Indiana University makes no claim of copyright to the original texts, which have been published before 1923 and are, therefore, in the public domain. Permission is granted to download, transmit or otherwise reproduce, distribute or display the original texts so long as the header is included in its entirety.
Indiana University makes a claim of copyright only to original contributions made by the Brevier Legislative Reports project team. All other use, including but not limited to commercial or scholarly reproductions, redistribution, publication or transmission, whether by electronic means or otherwise, is strictly prohibited without the prior permission of the copyright holder. Determination of the status of an online document ultimately rests with the person desiring to reproduce or use the item. If you have any questions or for general inquiries, contact the Indiana University Digital Library Program, diglib@indiana.edu.
This electronic text file was created by Optical Character Recognition (OCR), and has been encoded and edited using the recommendations for Level 3 of the TEI in Libraries Guidelines for Best Encoding Practices. Digital facsimiles are also provided.
The Maurer School of Law, Indiana University, Bloomington received an LSTA Grant to scan, markup, and make available the Brevier Legislative Reports. The Reports are a transcription of the proceedings of the Indiana General Assembly from the Special Session of 1858 to the Regular Session of 1887.
This being the day prescribed by the State Constitution for the meeting of the General Assembly, [Art. IV, sec. 9] the Senate of Indiana met in the Superior Court Room, in the north-east corner of the Marion County Court House.
The LIEUTENANT GOVERNOR [the Hon. ISAAC P. GRAY, of Randolph County], ex-officio President of the Senate, commanded order at 10:15 o'clock, and
directed the Auditor of State [the Hon. EB. HENDERSON, of Morgan County], who was
present for that purpose, under authority of the statute of December 23, 1872, to call
the roll of senators holding over. Twenty-four senators, elected in 1875 for the
constitutional term of four years, answered to their names as follows:
Newly-elected senators, as their districts were called, came forward and stood in front of the Clerk's table, as follows:
The senatorial oath was then administered by Hon. JAMES R. SLACK, of Huntington County, Judge of the Twenty-eighth Judicial District.
Mr. REEVE offered the following resolution:
"Resolved. That for the purpose of effecting a speedy and complete organization of the Senate, Daniel D. Dale, of White County, be and is hereby chosen Principal Secretary; Charles W. Ward. of Vermillion County, Assistant Secretary,and Richard Huncheon of Laporte County, Doorkeeper of the Senate for the present term."
And demanded the previous Question on it's adoption.
Mr. HARRIS rose to a point of order. Under the Constitution these officers can not be elected by resolution.
The LIEUTENANT GOVERNOR. The point of order is not well taken. The question is on seconding the demand for the previous question,
Mr. HARRIS appealed from the decision of the Chair [Mr. Grubbs joining him], and demanded that his appeal be decided at once.
The LIEUTENANT GOVERNOR. The Chair thinks there is no point of order.
Mr. HARRIS desired the Secretary to note that appeal from the decision of the Chair.
The LIEUTENANT GOVERNOR. The Chair again decided that their is no point of order.
Mr. HARRIS. We desire to be on the record.
The LIEUTENANT GOVERNOR. The question is on seconding the demand for the previous question, made by the Senator from Marshall, [Mr. Reeve.]
Messrs. HARRIS and OLDS demanded the yeas and nays. They were ordered, and being taken, resulted--yeas 25, nays 25.
The LIEUTENANT GOVERNOR was called upon, and voting "aye," announced the result as follows - ayes 26, nays 25.
Mr. HARRIS raised a point of order that the Lieutenant Governor can not vote on a proposition to second a demand for the previous question.
The LIEUTENANT GOVERNOR - The Chair is clearly of the opinion that upon every question, except the passage of a bill, the Lieutenant Governor has as good a right to vote; as any other member on the floor and he does not intend to surrender his constitutional privileges. The demand for the previous question has been seconded. The question now is "Shall the main question be now put?"
Messrs HARRIS and. OLDS again demanded the yeas and nays. They were ordered, and being taken resulted as the vote just taken - the Lieutenant Governor giving the casting vote - so the main question was ordered.
Mr. HARRIS called for a division of the resolution so the vote shall be taken first on the election of the principal secretary, second on the election of the assistant secretary, and third on the election of the doorkeeper,
The vote on the first clause of the resolution resulted, in a tie, as before, the Lieutenant Governor giving the casting vote in the affirmative.
Mr. HARRIS made the point of order that the President of the Senate, in the election of officers of the Senate, only performs the duty of the Auditor of State. If the Lieutenant Governor were absent, the Auditor would have no right to vote, and the President, of the Senate has not.
The LIEUTENANT GOVERNOR decided the point of order not well taken.
Mr. HARRIS desired to take an appeal from the decision of the chair.
The LIEUTENANT GOVERNOR decided there was nothing to appeal from.
Mr. HARRIS - I am a Senator upon this floor -
The LIEUTENANT GOVERNOR (interposing) The Senator will take his seat.
Mr. HARRIS. I desire that my appeal may be entered on the record.
The LIEUTENANT GOVERNOR - The Senator can have his appeal entered after the vote is taken. We are operating under the previous question.
The second and third clauses, and the resolution as a whole were severally adopted by the same vote as heretofore, which is as follows:
Those voting aye were Messrs. Benz, Briscoe, Burnell, Coffey, Donham, Foster. Fowler, Hart, Hefron, Kent, Kramer, Leeper, Major, Menzies, Peterson, Reeves, Riley, Sarninghausen, Tarlton, Traylor, Urrston, Viehe, Wood, Woollen, Winterbotham and Mr. President - 26.
Those voting nay were Messrs. Cadwallader, Comstock, Davenport, Davis, Dice, Gamigus, Grubbs, Harris, Heilman, Kahlo, Langdon, Mercer, Moore, Olds, Poindexter, Ragan, Shaffer, Shirk, Smith, Streight, Taylor, Treat, Trusler, Weir and Wilson - 25.
Pending the announcement of the final vote
Mr. HARRIS said: I desire to file my protest. The point of order I make is that the Auditor of State be present to organize the Senate, the President of the Senate has no right under the Constitution to vote.
The LIEUTENANT GOVERNOR. The Journal will not show that the Auditor of State is organizing the Senate. I think I am doing that myself. [Laughter.]
Mr. STREIGHT. The Chair decides that there is no point of order and refuses to put the question
The LIEUTENANT GOVERNOR (interposing). The Chair is announcing a vote.
Mr. STREIGHT asked the Chair to settle this question now.
The LIEUTENANT GOVERNOR The Chair will not do it now. The Senator knows it is not proper to interrupt the Chair when announcing a vote. The vote is yeas, 26; nays, 25; so the resolution is adopted, and the Chair declares Daniel D. Bale duly elected Principal Secretary of the Senate, Charles W Ward duly elected Assistant Secretary of the Senate, and Richard Huncheon Doorkeeper thereof
Mr. WINTERBOTHAM moved that the vote by which the resolution was adopted be reconsidered, and to lay the latter motion on the table.
Mr. HARRIS demanded a division of the question.
The LIEUTENANT GOVERNOR - It is not susceptible of division. The motion to lay the motion to reconsider on the table was agreed to by yeas, 26; nays, 25.
Then came a recess till 2 o'clock.
On motion of Mr. SARNIGHAUSEN the rules of the last session were adopted for the government of the Senate pro tempore.
Resolutions were adopted providing stationers' supplies; for committees' to wait upon the Governor and the House of Representatives, and on mileage and accounts, etc.
The LIEUTENANT - GOVERNOR laid before
Mr. REEVE moved their reference to a special committee of five, to be appointed by the Chair--himself not to be of the number.
Mr. HARRIS moved to make this subject the special order for to-morrow at 2 o'clock p. m., which was agreed to after Mr. Reeve had made an ineffectual motion - yeas 21, nays 26 - to lay it on the table.
The following described bills were introduced and read the first time, and referred to appropriate committees:
By MR. HARRIS [S. 1] for assessing and appraising of property for taxation, limiting the tax levies of counties and townships, etc , [with a memorial from the commissioners of Marion County,]
By MR. TRUSLER [S. 2] to fix the rate of interest at six per cent
By MR. DICE [S. 3] appropriating $125,000 for legislative expenses.
By MR. COMSTOCK [S. 4] to abolish the Superior Court of Wayne County.
By MR.MOORE [S.5] to legalize defective Sheriff's sales.
By MR. SARNIGHAUSEN [S. 6] legalizing acts of ex-notaries.
By Mr. RILEY [S. 7] to prevent corruption at elections.
By Mr. SARNIGHAUSEN [S. 8] to prevent grave robbing; and [S. 9] to promote the science of medicine and surgery, Referred to a special committee, viz: Messrs. SARNIGHAUSEN, Moore. Dice, Shaffer and Trusler
By Mr. DICE [S 10] and by Mr. Ragan [S. 11] fixing mileage and per diem of members and pay of employees.
By. Mr. HARRIS [S.12] concerning the trial of civil causes in Circuit and Superior Courts. Also [S. 13] relating to contempts of courts.
By Mr. KAHLO [S. 14] legalizing annexation of platted territory to Logansport.
By Mr. COMSTOCK [S. 15] regulating the number and qualifications of petit jurors.
By Mr. DICE [S. 16] in reference to changes of venue in cases of preliminary examination for felonies.
The LIEUTENANT GOVERNOR appoints as page Claude M. Douglass, of Harrison County, and Fred W. Faut, of Marion.
Mr. FOWLER obtained leave of absence.
And then the Senate adjourned till 10 o'clock to-morrow, under the rules.
This being the constitutional day appointed for the meeting of the Fifty-first General Assembly, the members of the House of Representatives came together at 10 o'clock in the Criminal Court Room of the Marion County Court House and were organized according to law under the direction of the HON. JNO. E NEFF, secretary of state.
The Secretary of State, using the gavel on the speaker's table, said the hour having arrived for the organization of the House of Representatives, all those persons on the floor are requested to arise while the Rev. Dr. Sloss, of the Presbyterian Church, would invoke the blessing of God.
The Clerk was directed to call the roll, members to respond by coming forward and receiving the oath of office, or affirmation, at the hands of Judge Niblack, of the Supreme Court, in the following order:
The SECRETARY then called for nominations for Speaker.
Mr. WILLARD nominated the Hon. HENRY S. CAUTHORNE, of Knox County.
Mr. HERROD nominated the Hon. JOHN OVERMEYER, of Jennings County.
Mr. CARTER nominated the Hon. JOHN D. WORKS. of Ohio and Switzerland Counties.
The vote was as follows: HENRY S. CAUTHORSE received 55 votes, JOHN OVERMEYER 38 votes, and. JOHN D. WORKS 4 votes.
The SECRETARY, after reading the result of the vote, declared HENRY CAUTHORNE Speaker of the Fifty-first General Assembly of the State of Indiana, the oath of office being administered by Judge NIBLACK.
The SPEAKER said:
GENTLEMEN OF THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES -- I return yon my heartfelt thanks for the distinguished honor you have conferred upon me in electing me to the honorable and responsible position of presiding over your deliberations during the present session At the very threshold of entering upon the official duties thus confided to me I promise you that no effort shall be spared on my part to discharge them in a manner alike satisfactory to you and honorable to myself, I shall summon to my aid all that there is in me of ability, energy and untiring devotion.
It was the remark of a Roman consul, in an early period of that celebrated Republic,
that a most striking difference was observed in the contrast of candidates for offices
of power and trust before and after obtaining them.
But I promise you that it shall be my constant endeavor to conduct myself whilst I
occupy the chair and hold the symbol of official authority in this House as to fulfill
the just, expectations you entertained in thus honoring me, or which I may have held out
as inducements to determine your action. Standing, as I now do, in the presence and in
hearing of the electors whose generous suffrages have placed me in this position, I can,
without fear and consistently with truth, look them in the face and declare, without a
blush, that I have resorted to no methods to secure it inconsistent with honor and
integrity. In an effort to gratify an ambition flattering to the mind of every man above
a groveling disposition, I have said or done nothing which I now have any just cause to
regret, which I would be prompted by any worthy motive to conceal, or which is in the
least inconsistent with the most strict and rigid rules of honorable and fair
dealing.
I freely confess to you that it is with fear and trembling that I approach the discharge of the duties devolved upon me as your presiding officer. I feel this moment in my heart that I am wanting in the necessary elements to enable me to discharge them properly and efficiently. I can only assure you, gentlemen that I shall do my best to please you and discharge my duty, and shall rely in a great measure upon your generous forbearance, and respectfully request your co-operation and advice in enabling me to forward and execute your will and pleasure. I am conscious, and am not backward in confessing that there art upon the floor of the House those whose knowledge and experience are far superior to any acquirements of my own, whose advice is confidently expected and will always be heeded. I flatter myself that I am not among the number of those who lay claim to perfection or object to criticism, but on the contrary, ever hold myself open to correction,and covet it when administered in a proper spirit. I wish you gentlemen to distinctly understand that I do not imagine or claim that I am the master of this House, but freely acknowledge I am only its servant. To use the language of Mr. Leuthal, a former Speaker of the House of Commons, "I have neither eyes to see, nor tongue to speak in this place but as the House is pleased to direct me, whose servant I am here."
I desire to say further in this connection that upon taking this chair and assuming the duties of the presiding officer of the House of Representatives, I lay aside all partisan feeling, and shall only be guided and controlled by the rules and usages of parliamentary law as I understand them, I now claim to be and shall endeavor to act as the Speaker of the House of Representatives, and not of any particular part or parcel thereof. It will be my duty and my pleasure to give all the members of this House an impartial and attentive hearing. I shall make it my special duty to observe attentively all the proceedings that transpire in this hall, and shall endeavor to hear every word that is uttered by any member on this floor, for the purpose of maintaining and preserving order and decorum, and of promptly checking in its incipiency any infraction of them.
In the eye of the law every member of this House is the peer of his fellow, and all stand on a perfect level and equality. Whatever difference may exist in the acquirements, knowledge, natural gifts or social standing of one member as compared with another, as the representatives of free and equal constituencies you all are entitled to the same privileges and are all equal the one with the other. I an aware that in this Assembly to-day there an many members who come here for the first time, to perform the highest and most honorable civil duty,that of representing free and enlightened constituency, and which may on that account be restrained by a natural diffidence to enter upon the discharge of new and untried performances. But I desire to say to all such that it will be my especial care and effort to deal with you in such a manner as to inspire confidence and give courage and self possession, and to lay the foundation for this treatment I desire to assure you that you can not, on your part, in any duty you will have to perform, suffer greater embarrassment than your humble servant now feels in entering upon the discharge of his own.
I also desire to have it understood that in the appointment of all committees of the
House it will be my aim and purpose to so frame them as to make them efficient, and the
work to be accomplished by
We are, gentlemen, gathered together from all parts of the State, and for the most part we come together as strangers to each other, But it is my desire and I hope I shall have the pleasure of forming the personal acquaintance of every member of the House, I hope that at every member will feel disposed to reciprocate my feeling in this regard, and will have no hesitancy in approaching me for this purpose. I may to some appear reserved, but I assure you, gentlemen, it arises from a natural diffidence, which clings to roe notwithstanding the fact, from professional and official employments, I have had frequent occasion to appear on public occasions.
We have met gentlemen to discharge a sacred trust reposed in us by our constituents, and it behooves us on every principle that can stimulate human action to do all in our power to discharge if in a proper manner. You represent a civilized, energetic and progressive population, rapidly advancing in all the avenues of material wealth and development, which has given an increased impetus to the arts. Ingenuity is written on every object that greets the eye around us. No object is too low and none too lofty for the comprehension of our people. Its impress is written, on the humble spinster wheel with its single flyer, and on the lofty factory of 10,000 spindles. It improves the wheat fan; it constructs the cotton gin and reforms the plow; it gives power to the loom and force to the iron mill; it stalks up the current of the waters in a steam car; it mounts the lofty billow of the ocean against wind and tide in the steam ship; its magic power imprints a volume in an hour on the steam press; it flies a thousand miles a second on the telegraph. These are the evidences of the thrift and contrivances of the people whose continued material, social and moral prosperity and advance depends largely upon the prudence and wisdom of the legislation that will be originated and matured in this General Assembly.
And, gentlemen, will you bear with me a moment whilst I call your attention to the character and capabilities of the great State, whose best interests are committed to your care and keeping. Everything in our great and growing State tends to dilate the heart, to send it upward in gratitude to a fatherly God; to send it outward in kindness to the brotherhood of man. The sky itself takes dimensions of grandeur tilted to the glorious scope of empire which it overhangs. Nowhere is the calm more divinely fair: nowhere is the storm more awfully sublime; nowhere does the sun shine forth with a more fearless beauty. Health lives in the breeze, and plenty comes teeming from the soil. Broad dominions, to be measured in leagues only by a scale of hundreds, snatch imagination from every belittling influence. There are ocean lakes in which, kingdoms might be buried and leave on the surface no ripple of their graves; rivers that sweep over half a world; cataracts eternal and resistless, that hymn forever the omnipotence which they resemble; mountains that stretch into the upper light and mock from their snow-crowned pinnacles the clouds and the thunders that crash below." Of such a country we form an integral part, and the very heart and center thereof. Indiana has a school fund the most princely of any State in the Union, and a system of common schools which brings within the reach of every child the possibility of an education sufficient for all the wants and purposes or social and business life. Indiana has a net work of railroads unsurpassed by any State in the Union, which consolidates and binds together with ties of iron the people of the State in one grand and united whole. Indiana is rich in all the elements of material wealth, which only needs development to advance and elevate her position among the sister States of the Union. All these great and diverified interests are committed to your fostering care, and by judicious and proper legislation may be greatly advanced and benefit, as oy a contrary course they may be retarded and defrauded. The people of the State expect of you that all the interests of the State will be properly cared for, and will sustain you in all needed legislation to accomplish this purpose, It is true you assemble in a time of great prostration of business and financial and commercial distress; and while it is right and proper that strict and rigid economy should be manifested and preserved in all appropriations, yet your constituents will expect and sustain you in all appropriations for educational, executive and judicial purposes sufficient for a healthy and proper administration of these varied interests. And while economy, retrenchmenty and reform should be your aim, I beg leave to remind you, in the language of a former distinguished seaker of this House, that parsimony is neither wise, good economy nor substantial reform.
In conclusion, I beg leave to assure you, gentlemen, that I shall do all in my power to make the present session of this House pleasant and agreeable to each member thereof, so that a recollection of it will be ever cherished by one and all, and fondly hope that your deliberations may culminate in such legislation as shall satisfy and gratify your constituents and that your work may be so approved and indorsed by them as to give a just cause to be proud that we were members of it.
It is not my province or the line of my duty, gentlemen, to make any suggestions or recommendations as to the needs of the various matters of State care and concern, or the necessary appropriations that will be required at your hands for these various purposes. Upon these matters his Excellency, the Governor, will, in due time, convey to you in his biennial message the proper and necessary information.
The organization of the House was then completed by the election of Mr. WEBSTER DIXON, of Jackson County, as principal clerk Mr. THOMAS E. MAYS, of DeKalb County, assistant clerk, and DAVID B. WILSON, of Shelby County, doorkeeper.
Mr. WILLARD offered a resolution, which was adopted, that the Senate be informed of the organization of the House.
Mr. CALDWELL offered a resolution, which was adopted, that the meetings of this House shall be at 9 o'clock a. m. until further ordered.
Mr. OVERMEYER offered a resolution which, was adopted, that, the rules governing the
last Honse of Representatives shall govern
And then came the adjournment until 2 o'clock p. m.
Mr. HUMPHRIES offered a resolution, which was adopted, appointing a committee of two to inform the Governor that the House was ready to hear any communication from him that he might desire.
The following described bills were introduced and read a first time:
By Mr. LEHMAN. [H. R. 1], appropriating the sum of $120,000 for the expenses of this General Assembly.
By Mr. NORMAN. [H. R. 2], regulating the interest on money. [6 per cent.]
By Mr. ENGLISH. [H. R. 3], for the assessment of real property in the year 1879, and every five years thereafter, with reference to the amount owned on the first day of April of the current year,
By Mr. EDWINS, [H. R. 4], regulating interest on money.
By Mr. STEVENS. [H. R. 5], to amend sec. 1 of an act regulating the number of grand jurors, approved March 13. 1875.
By Mr. STEVENS. [H. R. 6] an act to provide for the appraisement of all real property in 1879
By Mr. COMPTON. [H. R. 7], an act regulating the working of coal mines, and authorizing liens for work therein.
By Mr. CALDWELL. [H. R. 8], regulating interest on money.
By Mr. STEVENS. [H. R. 9], an act to regulate the setting of corner stones or monuments in public roads or highways.
By Mr. REED. [H. R. 10], to exempt claims and interests of the wives, children and dependents of members of Masonic, Odd Fellows and other charitable instiutions.
By Mr HESS, [H. R. 11], to amend an act of March 3, 1877, authorizing Boards of County Commissioners to construct gravel roads.
By Mr. SHIELDS, [H. R. 12], to legalize the incorporation of the city of Seymour.
By Mr. OVERMEYER. [H. R. 13], to amend section 172 of an act prescribing the manner of impanneling petit jurors, approved March 20, 1852.
By Mr. REED. [H. R. 14], to amend section 1 of an act to provide for the incorporation of public cemeteries.
By Mr. LEHMAN. [H. R. 15], to legalize the election held in the year 1878, in the town of Edinburg, and to legalize the acts of its officers.
Mr. LEHMAN offered a resolution authorizing the doorkeeper to furnish a copy of the revised statutes for the use of members during the session - then to be returned.
After amendments and an hour of debate the resolution was laid on the table.
Mr. LEHMAN offered a resolution, which was adopted, inviting the Senate to a joint session to-morrow at 2 o'clock p. m. to hear the address of his excellency, the Governor.
The House then adjourned.
The LIEUTENANT GOVERNOR directed the reading of the secretary's minutes of yesterday's proceedings.
MR. GRUBBS moved to correct the minutes by striking out the words "ex
officio principal secretary of the Senate," where they occur after the words
"Auditor of the State of Indiana."
MR. REEVE moved to amend by substituting these words: "By direction of the president of the Senate."
The latter motion was agreed to.
The LIEUTENANT GOVERNOR appointed James Dougherty and Arthur Moody, both of Indianapolis, additional pages.
MR. RAGAN offered a concurrent, resolution authorizing the formation of a joint committee of senators and representatives, with a view to obtaining from the attorney general of the State a legal opinion so construing the constitutional limit to the length of the sessions of the General Assembly, as that the same may be extended to sixty-one working days - members and employes, however, to draw pay for but sixty-one days.
On motion of MR. FOWLER it was laid on the table by yeas, 40: nays, 10.
Mr. TAYLOR offered the following:
Resolved, That the state librarian be directed to furnish the members of the Senate and lieutenant governor a set of Davis' Revised Statutes, taking their receipt therefor; such statutes to be returned to the state librarian at the close of this session, or paid for at actual cost, and in case of such statutes remain after the close of the session the same shall be sold to any one wanting them, the funds to be turned into the state treasury.
Mr. FOWLER moved the following as a substitute:
Resolved, That a copy of Davis' Statutes be furnished such senators as were not members of the last Senate, to be returned to the secretary of state at the close of the session.
Mr. OLDS moved to amend the resolution by striking out all after the word 'statutes," where it first occurs.
Mr. REEVE offered the following as a substitute for the whole subject matter:
Resolved, That a copy of the statutes be furnished by the secretary of state to new members of the Senate and the lieutenant governor, to be recipted for and to be returned at the expiration of the session, or be paid for at cost price by the members retaining them.
On motion by Mr. BURRELL it was laid on the table.
The amendment to the amendment [Mr. Olds'] was rejected by yeas, 40; nays, 10.
Mr. SHAFFER offered the following substitute for the whole matter;
Resolved, That the secretary of state furnish a copy of Davis' Revised Statutes to the chairman of each committee, taking the receipt of the chairman therefor, to be again returned at the close of the session of the Legislature.
On motion of Mr. OLDS it was laid on the table, as was also Mr. Fowler's amendment, on the motion of Mr. WINTERBOTHAM-- yeas, 31; nays, 18.
Mr. REEVES made an ineffectual motion to substitute the words "secretary of state" for the words "state librarian."
Mr. FOWLER proposed a further amendment providing that the statutes shall not be sold for less than cost price.
Mr. STREIGHT proposed a substitute directing the state librarian to furnish the president of the Senate and new members with one copy each of Davis' Revised Statutes.
Mr. TAYLOR demanded the previous question, which was seconded by the Senate, and under its operations Mr. Streight's substitute was rejected--yeas, 19; nays, 31. Mr. Fowler's amendment was rejected and and the original resolution was adopted by yeas, 26; nays. 24.
And then came the recess till 2 o'clock.
Mr. KENT introduced a bill [S. 17] to enable the owners of wet lands to drain and reclaim the same, which was read the first time and. referred to the committee on swamp lands. On his further motion 200 copies were ordered printed.
Mr. WOOD introduced a bill [S. 18] to declare
Wabash and Erie Canal land patents, and certified copies thereof, evidence of title,
which was read the first time and referred to the
A committee from the House of Representatives appearing for that purpose.
On motion by Mr. FOWLER the Senate, under escort of the committee, proceeded to the Hall of the House for the purpose of hearing the biennial message of his excellency, Hon. JAMES D. WILLIAMS, governor of the State of Indiana.
When senators returned and the Lieutenant Governor had resumed the chair -
Mr. COFFEE introduced a bill [S. 19] to create the Forty-third Judicial Circuit [the county of Bartholomew]; also making the counties of Brown and Monroe the Ninth Circuit; also making the Tenth Circuit to consist of the Counties of Orange and Lawrence, which was read the first time and referred to the committee on organizations of courts.
On motion by Mr. REEVE upon a division - affirmative 26, negative 22 - it was taken up now; the question being on his pending motion to refer the papers to a special committee.
Mr. SARNIGHAUSEN moved to amend so as to refer the papers to the standing
Mr. HARRIS favored this motion.
Mr. REEVE presented reason why the reference should take the course indicated by his motion, but having no personal feeling in the matter he asked and obtained consent to withdraw his motion authorizing the chair to construct a special committee.
The LIEUTENANT GOVERNOR then directed the reference of all the papers in the case to
the regular standing
The following described bills were introduced, read the first time and referred to appropriate committees:
By Mr. GRUBBS, [S. 20] giving married women power to execute contracts and the control of their separate property.
By Mr. DAVENPORT, [S. 21] to amend the act of March 12, 1875, establishing courts in cities of 6,000 inhabitants.
By Mr. FOSTER, [S. 22] legalizing acts of the board of trustees in the town of New Haven, in Allen County.
By Mr. SHAFFER, [S. 23] legalizing acts of the town of Huntington.
By Mr. KRAMER, [S 24] to enforce the attendance of witnesses and to avoid the expense of a second subpoena in the cases of continuance.
By Mr. REILLY [S. 25] to amend section 1 of the supervisor's act of March 5, 1877
It was ordered that when the Senate adjourns it be till 10 o'clock Monday
And then the Senate adjourned.
The House met at 9 o'clock.
The SPEAKER ordered the reading of yesterday's journal, which was corrected and approved.
The SPEAKER announced the appointment of pages, viz: L.L. Confer, of Marshall County; Thomas H. Morgan, of Marion County; Joseph Somer, of Knox, and Charles Smith, of Madison.
The following described bills were introduced, read the first time and passed to the second reading:
By Mr. STEVENS [H. R. 16] defining what property held and owned by any person or persons, and transferred under the laws of this State to any township, town or city, may be taxed for educational purposes, in said township or city.
By Mr. DALTON [H. R. 17] to repeal an act to authorize the construction of railroads by counties and townships taking stock in and making donations to railroad companies, approved May 12, 1869.
By Mr. DALTON, [H. R. 18] regulating interest in money and judgements [6 per cent.]
By Mr. EDWARDS [H. R. 19] for the protection of fish/
By Mr. CONNOR, [H. R. 20] providing for a Bureau of Statistics and Geology
By Mr. CONNOR, [H. R. 21] transferring the duties of township assessor to township trustees and abolishing the office of township assessor.
By Mr. CONNOR, [H. R. 22] providing for a homestead [exemption, $1,000].
By Mr. HEROD, [H. R. 23] to create the 43d judicial circuit.
By Mr. ENGLISH [H. R. 24] regulating the indebtedness of counties having a voting population of over 20,000
By Mr. ENGLISH [H. R. 25] to fix the number of Senators and Representatives [Senate, 50: House, 100]
By Mr. ENGLISH [H. R. 26] providing for the appraisement of real estate and personal property, for the collection of taxes and the manner of accounting for the same.
By Mr. ENGLISH [H. R. 27] to fix the number of members of the General Assembly.
By Mr. ENGLISH [H. R. 28] to divide the State into 13 Congressional districts.
By Mr. WORKS [H. R. 29] concerning the rights and liabilities of married women.
By Mr. WORKS [H. R. 30] to amend sec. 8 of an act concerning the alienation of property.
By Mr. ALLEN, [H. R. 31] to define certain practices in the various courts.
By Mr. WATSON, [H. R. 32] in relation to prosecution of felonies.
By Mr. WATSON [H. R. 33] to amend the 3d, 7th, 9th and 10th sections of an act prescribing the jurisdiction of justices of the peace in State cases
By Mr. WATSON [H. R. 34] concerning interest on money [6 percent, unless agreement in writing, and then not to exceed 8 per cent].
By Mr. WATSON [H. R. 35] to amend sec. 64 of an act providing for the election of justices of the peace.
By Mr. WATSON [H. R. 36] to deduce and suppress tippling houses and to regulate the sale of liquors.
By Mr. FAULKNER, [H. R. 37] fixing the per diem and mileage of members and employes of the General Assembly.
By Mr. FAULKNER, [H. R. 38] to amend section 6 of an act concerning tresspassing animals, inclosures and partition fences.
By Mr. FAULKNER [H. R. 39] to amend an act providing for the appointment and election of supervisors and prescribing certain of their duties
By Mr. FAULKNER [H. R. 40] to amend section 3, 4, 6 and 8 of an act to prescribe certain powers and duties of county and township officers concerning elections.
By Mr. BAKER, [H. R. 41] to repeal and act regarding eligibility to office of township trustees.
By Mr. BAKER, [H. R. 42] to repeal section
By Mr. BAKER, [H. R. 43] concerning interest on money [6 per cent].
By Mr. TAYLOR of Warrick, [H. R. 44] to amend section 2 of an act to provide for a general system of common schools.
By Mr. TAYLOR of Warrick, [H. R. 45] to legalize taxes levied by incorporated towns.
By Mr. MITCHELL [H. R. 46] to amend section 1 of an act to provide for township elections, approved March 3, 1877
Mr. GORDON offered a resolution tendering the use of this hall to the Indianapolis Equal Suffrage Society for a lecture by Mrs. Elizabeth Cady Stanton, on the evening of January 18.
The resolution was adopted.
Mr. HEROD offered a resolution, which was adopted, that committee of three be appointed to make such arrangements with the clergy of this city as will insure the opening of each day's section with prayer.
The SPEAKER made the committee to consist of Messrs. Herod, Edwins and Briggs
The SPEAKER said he had just received the papers from the secretary of State contesting the seats held by Mr. Bearss of Miami, Mr. Joseph P. Arnold of Grant and Blackford, and Mr. Meirs of Monroe.
Mr. SLEETH offered a resolution, which was adopted, calling upon the secretary of state to furnish a list of the amendments to the Constitution, now on file in his office.
A resolution was adopted that when the House adjourn to meet this afternoon it adjourn to meet Monday at 2 o'clock p.m.
The House then took a recess until 2 o'clock p.m.
Mr. LEHMAN offered a resolution, which was adopted, authorizing the appointing of a committee of three to escort senators to the House of Representatives to listed to the message of his excellency, the governor.
The SPEAKER made the committee to consist of Messrs. Lehman, Gordon and Works.
When this service was performed--
Mr. HUMPHRIES offered a resolution, which was adopted under which a committee of two senators and two representatives was appointed by the lieutenant governor to wait upon his excellency, the governor, and inform him that the General Assembly is now in joint convention and awaiting to hear his biennial message.
Upon the return of the committee
The LIEUTENANT GOVERNOR introduced his excellency, Governor WILLIAMS, who proceeded to the delivery of his message, -
I cordially welcome you to the capital for the discharge of the important duties entrusted to you by the people. It will be my pleasure to aid you in learning the transactions of the executive department of our State government during the past two years, and in providing for the needs of our community during the ensuing two years, for which we are together responsible.
The last General Assembly, having been convened in special session for the completion of important matters, which had been inexcusably delayed until a late day of the regular session, adjourned March 15, 1877. The acts of the two session, in one volume with the "accurate statement of the receipts and expenditures of the public money" required by the constitution, were so "published and circulated in the several counties of the State by authority," that by the receipt and filing of the same in Pike county, they took effect July 2, 1877, as evidenced by my proclamation of July 5, 1877.
Joint resolutions proposing nine important amendments to the constitution were passed, and the proposed amendments, having been agreed to by a majority of the members elected to each of the two Houses, were entered upon their journals and referred to the body now constituted of yourselves. It is desired that you take early action upon this pending business, that the proposed amendments, if agreed to by a majority of all the members elected to each House, may be at once submitted to the electors of the State, and, if ratified by them, which you may proceed to enact a series of wholesome laws now urgently demanded by the interests of our people.
I congratulate you that the instruction to our Senators and Representatives, conveyed by a joint resolution, requesting them "to use all lawful means to procure the speedy enactment of a law of Congress restoring the legal tender quality of the silver dollar of coinage of 1792, and making the same a legal tender for the payment of all debts, public and private, except as otherwise provided by law," has aided in the restoration of our original unit of value, by an act of Congress to which they gave their support. Sustained by its original double metallic standard, our financial system gives promise of greater stability than when deprived of its support.
The mandates of other resolutions addressed to ministerial officers have been obeyed, and you will be advised of the conclusions reached by them.
The act of March 7, 1877, providing judges to preside at adjourned terms, and to try cases on change of venue from the judge of a circuit, has been of advantage to litigants in securing a speedy trial, but the provision for compensation, made in section 5, has been embarrassed in their efforts to comply with an appropriations so unusual and irregular. Gentlemen who have performed services await further legislation providing for their compensation.
The additional courts constituted for the counties of Marion, Allen, Cass, Vanderburg, Jackson, Washington, and Wayne, have been organized by the appointment and qualification and subsequent election of judges.
The acts providing for the election of township officers who were found to contain conflicting provisions, which must be harmonized by you.
The modification of the act defining larceny, and prescribing a punishment more within the discretion of the court than before, has served a good purpose. It may be well to revise other sections of the criminal code in the light of this experience.
The "act authorizing the acquisition of the Green River Island, or to locate the true boundary line at said island." has been so far executed as to learn from the Governor of Kentucky that the action of the commissioner appointed by that State to make the survey had been ratified and confirmed by the Legislature.
The attempted amendment of section 22 of the act for the incorporation of towns, conferring enlarged powers upon the Board of Trustees, has been held to be void, because violating as well settled rule for the amendment of statutes.
I appointed Messrs. Frank Emerson, John B. Hannah and Robert P. Haynes, three
discreet persons, to settle and adjust the claims made against the State
Prison South, payable out of the appropriation of $130,000 made by the act of
March 10, 1877. Their work was so discreetly and carefully done, as shown by
their
The constitution, in dividing the powers of the government, has vested
"the legislative authority of the State" in yourselves, the judicial
power" in the courts, and the residue, "the executive, including the administrative," "in a governor." The
duties of the respective offices denominated "administrative" are
"directed by law." The officers are the ministerial agents of the
people upon whom duties are "enjoined by law" which must be
literally and exactly performed. The governor is charged with the duty
"to execute the laws," "to suppress Insurrection" and
"to repel invasion," and is given ample military power. It is
provided that "be shall from time to time give to the General Assembly in
information touching the condition of the State and recommend such measures as
he shall judge to be expedient." To do this, it is provided further that
"the Governor shall transact all necessary business with the officers of
government and may require information in writing from the officers of the
administrative department upon any subject relating to the duties of their
respective offices," and it is enjoined that "he shall
take care that the laws be faithfully executed." He is given power
in his discretion to control the execution of process upon criminal judgments
and modify fines and judgments rendered upon forfeited bonds. To avoid the
consequences of vacancies in certain ministerial offices and in the General
Assembly itself he is authorized to appoint to the one and "issue writs
of election to fill" the other. He may convene the General Assembly at a
place remote from the seat of government, and "may at any time by
proclamation call a special session." His part in the business of
legislation is such that he may return to the General Assembly for its
reconsideration any bill for an act presented to him for approval and
execution. It thus appears that the Governor is not a ministerial officer, but
rather a supervisor of the transactions of others and possessed of
discretionary powers peculiarly his own, and entitled to a respect equal to
that accorded to each of the other departments. If so, much legislation
heretofore enacted imposing laborious and responsible duties of a ministerial
character upon the office has been justifiable simply because of the
acquiescence of the incumbent in the will of the law-making body, and is not a
good precedent to be followed. The duties incident to the establishment and
management of Purdue University, the House of Refuge, the Orphans' Home, the
Female Prison, the Insane Hospital, the State House, the valuation of property
for taxation and sundry other boards of an administrative character, may be
mentioned as examples of that disposition. With a few exceptions, the office
which I have the honor to hold has been treated with marked respect by the
administrative officers amenable to it under the constitution. The retiring
State officers are entitled to great credit for the zeal, Integrity and
ability which they have displayed in the discharge of the duties of their
several offices during their four years' occupancy thereof, and for the
reforms which they have effected therein. Each has my grateful acknowledgments
for his co-operation with me. One who will enter upon a further and unusual
term of service has in his election thereto received a rare commendation from
our appreciative people.
An act approved February 3, 1853, provides for annual reports of State
officers and benevolent institutions, the same to be made to the Governor.
Officers since created have by executive requirement and implied legislative
direction reported in like manner. These reports for the year ending October
31, 1877, fifteen in all, have been published in a volume of convenient form,
entitled "Annual Reports of Indiana, 1877," and are laid before you
for your information. The Secretary of State communicates a condensed report
of the business of his office for the year including a report of the
proceedings of the administrative boards of which he is Secretary ex officio, a register of State and county officers, commissioners of
deeds, notaries public and justices of the peace, and others to whom
commissions have issued, a list of corporations and associations organized,
and other matters pertaining to the office The reports of the Auditor and
Treasurer together constitute a complete showing of the transactions of the
Treasury department. Upon the enactment of the appropriation laws of March 10,
1877, the fiscal business was made to conform strictly to their requirements.
The general fund had and received during the year $2,12S.242 83, and disbursed
$1,859,005 36, leaving October 31, 1877, $269,237 47. The receipts included
$200,000 of the temporary loan, being the proceeds of a renewal at a less rate
of interest of the part falling due December 1, 1876, which appears to have
been paid. Each disbursement account has its authority in those acts, so much
as precedes April 1, being legalized by the third section of the first act,
and the others limited by the express terms of its sections one and two. As
the accounts of each institution were verifiable by the Auditor of State, they
constitute exhibits in detail of the sums charged to them. They will be
carefully examined by your appropriate committees.
The report from the Department of Public Instruction is brief. Its contents relate mostly to the enumeration and school attendance, and the school funds and revenues for the year, and will reach you in a revised and more comprehensive form in the biennial report.
I respectfully transmit a report to you of each case of reprieve, commutation, or pardon granted and, also, the names of all persons in whose favor remissions of fines and forfeitures have been made and the several amounts remitted during the years 1877 and 1878, by my predecessor in office and myself, as required by the constitution. Accompanying it are some tables approximating accuracy, and showing the growth of crime and punishment of criminals since the reception of the first convict in the State prison. Imperfect as our criminal statistics are, they may afford valuable aid in legislating upon an important and troublesome matter. The constitution provides "that the General Assembly may by law constitute a council, to be composed of officers of State without whose advice and consent the Governor shall not have power to grant pardons in any case except such as may by law be left to his sole power," In order to relieve the executive of a great responsibility, I recommend a law in accordance with this proviso.
For your information as to the transactions of the government, during the year ending October 31, 1878, I lay before you reports made to me by officers named as follows:
The Commissioners of the Hospital for the Insane have preferred to follow the mandate of the act of 1852 providing for the government of the Hospital rather than the act of 1853, providing for annual reports from the subordinate officers to the head of the executive service, and have made their report directly to you. It was received at my office December 7, and, appearing not to be made to it, was delivered to the Secretary of State, that upon his organization of the House of Representatives he might deliver it to the Speaker.
The act approved May 11, 1861, for the organization and regulation of the Indiana militia had so far become a forgotten relic of our civil war as to be omitted entirely from the last revision of the statutes. The constitution (article XII) provides who shall be subject to military service and that "the General Assembly shall determine the method of dividing the militia into divisions, brigades, regiments, battallions and companies and fix the rank of all staff officers" and divide it into classes of sedentary and active militia. These requirements are met by the act of 1861. It prescribes the manner of organizing and mustering a company into the active militia denominated "The Indiana Legion" and for the supply of arms and equipments, councils of administration and courts martial; calls into active service and resignations, dismissals and discharges. Until quite recently the last-named have been the most popular features of the law. Of the system a general officer, who observed its workings while protecting the southern border of the state from invasion in 1862, wrote to his superior in command: "Much may be done to increase the efficiency of The Legion by proper amendments of the law. There must be some inducements to go into the companies, either by way of exemption from other burdens, or by bounty, or by both. Whatever the inducement may be, it must be a continuing one, so that it will have the effect not only to impel men to join the companies, but to continue in them and discharge the duties which result from membership. It can not be expected that men will long give up their other employments and spend their money to get up and maintain military organizations without some inducement. The law should provide a short and efficient means of compelling attendance of members at drill, etc. Its provisions on this subject are circuitous and inefficient. The law provides for swearing and the members of the companies after the election and it is said, in many instances, that those who have signed the articles of association, not getting an office, have refused to take the oath. It is suggested to me that the oath should be administered first and the election held afterward. Other amendments might be suggested in regard to the organization of companies. The proves ought to be greatly simplified."
The present adjutant general has succeeded in securing the organization of twenty-one companies, those forming the associations, having been led to assume the burdens imposed by the law because of a generous rivalry between the lovers of military tactics and display in our leading cities and towns. You will be asked to add needed amendments to the existing statute, or to enact a new law affording as much encouragement to military organizations as do the laws of other states of equal rank.
Occasion for the use by civil authority of a well drilled and well disciplined body of troops may arise at any time in our populous localities, or even in remote districts where men congregate who have little knowledge of our laws and no respect for the peace and dignity of our state.
On the 26th of July, 1877, I was officially informed by the sheriff of Marion
county that certain railway employes, because of a disagreement with their
employers, had ceased from service, and by their inactivity had occasioned an
interruption and delay of transportation across his county; that, with the
exception of the detention of railway trains, there had been now forcible
violation of the peace; and that no injury to person or property had been
committed. He advised the issuance by me of a proclamation ordering all
unlawful assemblages to disperse, cease their violence, and yield to the
authority of law, expressing the opinion such an order would command that
respect which an officer occupying his position could not secure. In
conclusion, he said: "Such a proclamation from you as I suggest might
accomplish the desired result; but in my judgement persuasion will not avail
anything. I have no organized force at my command of any description, but am
utterly powerless in the event of a serious disturbance, unless you will at
once furnish me an adequate force to maintain the law." I at once issued
and caused to be published my proclamation of that date. The organized
companies in this county were ordered into camp at the United States arsenal
grounds, and the Adjutant General, assisted by prominent citizens of
Indianapolis constituting a "committee of safety," rapidly
organized, mustered, officered and equipped other companies and caused them to
encamp on the same grounds. I requested General Ben Harrison to assume command
of the forces so organized. He replied, saying: "I am very much obliged
for this expression of your confidence, but the committee of safety has
recommended General Dan Macauley for the place, and I would therefore ask you
to commission him." He, however, took command of a company. General
Macauley was commissioned, and immediately took command and organized a staff,
which was also commissioned and entered upon duty with him. By advice of the
committee of safety, and especially of a member thereof, who is an experienced
officer, and the commandant himself, to avoid the possible danger of a delay
in transmitting formal requisitions to the ordnance department for ordnance
stores due the State, I telegraphed the President, saying: "In view of
threatened domestic violence growing out of the railroad strike, I request
that authority be at once given to the commandant of the arsenal to render all
the aid possible in preserving the public peace." Receiving at the same
time and complying with requisitions for troops much less formal from the
Governors of other States, and unaware
Other disturbances growing out of our unsettled labor question occurred in the mining region of Fountain county, with deplorable results. A want of due carefulness in the local authorities resulted in the issuance and charge to that county of arms, which were received from it upon approved bond by persons unworthy of membership in a company of the militia. It became the duty of the State authorities to review these proceedings and secure a return of the arms to the State and a disbandment of the company. This delicate duty was satisfactorily discharged by the Adjutant General, whose report will more fully disclose its nature. At the request of the Judge of the Fountain Circuit Court, troops were send to and maintained in the county for some weeks to protect the lives and property of citizens, insure peace, and secure a prompt administration of justice to offenders. The expenses of this call were met as before.
The Quartermaster General accounts for the military stores received, issued, and now held by him. The State yet has a credit of $7,295.08 upon her account with the General Government under the act for a distribution of arms to the States.
By my order, an experienced officer was detailed by the Adjutant General to inspect the arms belonging to the State. As this duty had not been performed for many years, it will be of interest to learn the exact quantity and condition of our munitions of war as disclosed by his report.
It is proper that I should say to you that companies have been called out and kept in camp several days and many of the members who were laboring men thereby lost their situations. Under section 33 of the law, they could receive only the small pay allowed to soldiers of the United States army, and the fund at my disposal would not admit of an additional allowance as bounty. I recommend an appropriation to pay them a reasonable compensation for their services.
The constitution makes it the duty of the General Assembly to provide by law for the support of institutions for the education of the deaf and dumb and of the blind and also for the treatment of the insane. At the date of tis adoption, an institution had been provided for each of these classes, all having been founded about thirty years ago.
From an attendance in 1848 of 92 and an annual expenditure of $11,765.83, the attendance of the Institution for the Deaf and Dumb has increased to 328 and the expenditure to $62,994.99. Twelve hundred and seven pupils have received instruction. The course of study has been enlarged and improved to correspond to the progress in the common school education guaranteed to our children who have the use of their faculties. A table showing the comparative attendance and expenses of the institution since 1853 is given by the trustees in their report. More than one hundred children having claim to an education can not be received because of a lack of accommodations for them. You will be asked to provide for the construction of an addition to the present building.
The average attendance of pupils in the Institute for the Education of the Blond during the year was 108. Five hundred and ninety-eight pupils have received instruction since the opening of the institute in 1847. The expenditures for the fiscal year were in the sum of $31,404.96, being $259.20 per annum for each pupil. The estimate for the ensuing two years is made upon an anticipated attendance of 120 pupils at $230.00 each per annum. Additional accommodations are asked.
Since November 1, 1848, the Hospital for the Insane has received and treated 7,648 patients. During the past year 470 were admitted, and the same number discharged, leaving 614 remaining at the close of the year as at the beginning. The expenditure was in the sum of $132,129.67. To provide for the large number of insane who need treatment, and several hundred who have been pronounced incurable, and in need of the care and protection afforded by a State institution planned and constructed for the purpose, a new building, to be called the Department for Women, was authorized by an act approved March 11, 1875. Six hundred thousand dollars has been appropriated and nearly all of that amount expended. You will be asked to inspect the work done, and provide means for completing and furnishing the building for immediate use.
Since the transfer of the soldiers from the Soldiers' Home at Dayton, the institution has been devoted to the orphans of deceased soldiers and seamen. The building was destroyed by fire on the night of September 9, 1877. The trustees used the money received upon policies of insurance for the construction of a building much more suitable for the purpose than was the former, and applied an un-expended balance of the year's appropriation towards the payment of the additional expense, making $41,238.32 in all. You will be asked to reimburse the officers and teachers and other inmates for their losses of clothing and other effects by fire.
All superintendents, officers and employes engaged in any of the benevolent institutions of the State, who are boarding or lodging in the institutions, should receive much less salaries than those who board and lodge themselves; and the superintendent or officer who has a family boarding in the institution should be required to pay board for any and all except himself and wife, unless employed as assistants.
Our educational interests have been under the careful supervision of an officer possessing the confidence of the people. His biennial report will give you in a comprehensive form a history of the recent progress and present condition of our common school system and also of the institutions of a higher grade which have been the outgrowths of it. The reports of the Trustees of Indiana University, Purdue University and the State Normal School will disclose the fact that the higher education afforded by the State is given at an expense far beyond that of other institutions sustained by private contributions, and in excess of a just economy. The pupils who attend the Normal School do so to qualify themselves as teachers, the better to make a living thereafter. I am unable to see any good reason why they should not pay a reasonable tuition fee, thereby making the support of the school much less burdensome to the tax-payers, many of whom receive not direct benefit from it. The same rule could properly be applied to the two universities.
The law authorizing each county to send two students free of charge to each of the universities should be repealed, and all students should be required alike to pay a reasonable tuition fee.
Our school fund is now reported in the sum of nine million dollars, which perhaps equals that of any other State in the Union. It is constituted of the State's indebtedness (nearly four millions), the common school fund held by the counties (about two and one half millions.) and the congressional township school fund (also about two and one-half millions), each part requiring peculiar care in its management. I trust that it will be your pleasure as to produce the larges results in the interest of the rising generation.
Your attention is called to the financial report of the officers of the State Board of Agriculture. The Board owns thirty-six acres of land upon which their improvements are situated, and two acres east of the grounds in all thirty-eight acres, upon which there is a mortgage of sixty thousand dollars drawing eight percent interest. Fifteen thousand three hundred dollars is due the guarantors of the exposition fund. The State advanced twenty-five thousand dollars two years ago. It is for you to consider whether the State should pay seventy-five thousand dollars more and take the property or lose the amount so advanced. Although the last was a very successful fair, the net earnings would not pay the interest on the indebtedness. I trust you will give this subject a careful consideration.
The Horticultural Society has accounted for the small annual bounty of five hundred dollars appropriated for the encouragement of its work. You will be interested in the proceedings of its annual meetings as reported by the secretary and published by the State.
Crime has risen steadily and rapidly increased. Our old prison for male convicts is greatly overcrowded and the new has had use for the additional accommodations provided by the last Legislature.
The Female Prison has held more than three times the number (17) transferred to it, when it was opened in 1873. As required by the act of March 3, 1877, the board of managers was reorganized as thereby constituted, Mrs. Emily A. Roache, Mrs. Rhoda M. Coffin and Mrs. Eliza C. Hendricks receiving commissions for their respective terms and assuming the duties imposed upon them by law. Assisted by Mrs. Smith, the superintendent, and others, they have, as shown by their two reports, trained the inmates of the institution to habits of industry, practiced a rigid economy in every department and kept their expenditures within the appropriations. Some indebtedness for the enclosure of the grounds should be provided for. The managers have had much trouble and annoyance because of bad sewerage. I recommend an appropriation of four thousand dollars to secure a permanent and reliable system in its stead, that being the amount of the estimate prepared.
The Prison North had at the beginning of the last year 646 and at its close 605 convicts, 295 having been received, 340 released, and the average being 619. The disbursements were $75,295.73, being $868.06 in excess of the earnings. This excess is explained by the additional accommodations provided for an expected increase in the number committed to the prison. The new cell house and workshop authorized by the last Legislature were completed and a main sewer also built, leaving a balance of $19,666.03 of the $80,000 appropriated. This amount the directors think could well be devoted to the construction of a new dwelling house for the warden, some cells for disciplinary purposes. Additional shop room is asked. It is urged that the district of the prison be enlarge by the addition of one tier of counties next south of the line of demarcation and that the good time of convicts be increased to twice that now allowed. In the education of the convicts required by law the moral instructor finds great necessity for proper text books and asks that they and books for general reading that will inculcate correct sentiments be provided. The salary of the physician is regarded by the officers as quite too small for the services expected, and they ask that is be increased to the proper amount.
The Prison South had at the beginning of the last year 590 convicts, received
335, making 925 in all, and released 299, leaving 626 remaining at the close.
The daily average during the year was 626. Since its establishment in 1822, it
has received 6,526 convicts and released 5,900. More than two-thirds of those
remaining are unmarried men. Less than one-third are over thirty years of age.
Forty-four are sentenced for life. The expense of maintenance per man was
$29.03, which was the lowest in ten years, being less than one-half the
expenditure five
It is enjoined on the constitution "that the General Assembly shall provide houses of refuge for the Correction and reformation of juvenile offenders." An institution for boys was established at Plainfield in 1867, and has been in operation eleven years. One thousand one hundred and twenty-eight boys have been admitted during that time. All can not be classed as offenders. Many have been committed for a reform of their character that they may be from violating the laws. At the close of the last year 145 had been admitted and 383 remained, that being the greatest number in the institution at any one time. The Board of Commissioners have reduced the expenditures greatly below the amount appropriated, leaving the surplus in the treasury. Their estimates for subsequent years appear in a reduced form. They have added to the accommodations and reformatory influences of the institution and report it in good condition.
Like provision for controlling the criminal inclinations of girls has been made in the reformatory department, connected with the Female Prison. Two hundred and ninety-six have been received since 1873.
was removed to the building rented for its accommodation, and has, by exchanges and purchases, received the usual additions to its shelves. The librarian and his lady assistant have filled with credit their respective positions, as their careful preparations for your meeting will convince you. Hon. Horace P. Biddle, of our Supreme Court, who has devoted his life to general literature, as well as to that of his profession, has expressed to me a "desire to dispose of" his "library to the State of Indiana, to be kept as a part of the State library, it contains about six thousand volumes, collected at a cost of over $10,000, and is the gradual accumulation of fifty years." He proposes "to sell the entire library to the state for a nominal sum," retaining its possession and use during his life and providing for its delivery "by contract upon a consideration reaching each volume rather than by donation, that" he "may know the books will ultimately reach their destination." Recognizing the necessity for legislative action authorizing the Librarian to make such a contract, he holds himself in readiness at any convenient time to adjust the details.
The last General Assembly, by an act approved March 14,1877, authorized and provided for the erection of a new State House, and for matters incident, thereto. I appointed General Thomas A. Morris and General John Love of Marion county, W. R. McKeene, Esq. of Vigo county, and Hon. I. D. G. Nelson, of Allen county, as prominent representatives of "the two leading political parties of the State," who should, together with myself, "constitute the Board of State House Commissioners." They at once qualified and each gave the required bond and entered upon the discharge of his duties. Mr. McKeene, on account of private business found it necessary, in January last, to tender his resignation, which was reluctantly accepted. I immediately appointed Hon. John Collett, of Vermillion County, as his successor. He accepted the office, qualified and gave bond, and still serves as a member of the board, which is otherwise unchanged. The commissioners have pushed forward the work as fast as the means at their command would warrant. In addition to the quarterly reports made as required "for the use of the public" and containing "a synopsis of their proceedings and an account of their expenditures" I requested that they make their report, for the last quarter so comprehensive as to include the documents and proceedings which are, in their opinion, important for your information. Such a detailed statement has been prepared and is here with submitted for your careful examination. The tax levy was for the year 1877, one cent, and for 1878, two cents on the one hundred dollars. At the close of the year ending October 31, 1878, the proceeds of the tax had reached $42,023.56, most of which has been expended upon orders of the board. The proceeds of the current levy will perhaps not greatly exceeding $150,000, which is not as much as ought to be and could be profitably expended during the year.
The constitution provides that "no law shall authorize any debt to be
contracted on behalf of the State debt; to repel invasion, suppress
insurrection, or if hostilities be threatened, provide for the public
defense." Our heaviest interest charge, exceeding one-fourth of a million
dollars per annum, is upon an indebtedness to the common school fund caused by
the use of money for general expenses. In the absence of any provision for its
payment, we may assume it to be the settled policy of the State to make the
loan perpetual. If so, you can safely provide for a special annual levy of say
five cents on the one hundred dollars to pay the interest upon our
indebtedness and to gradually discharge the other claims growing out of a
negligent administration of the school revenues in former years. The temporary
loan largely represents the old indebtedness incurred by our system of
internal improvements before the adoption of our present constitution, and
reasonably included with our "State debt" referred to therein.
Having made special provision for these extraordinary demands, by authorized
loans and separate taxation, the revenues of the general fund at a greatly
reduced rate, say seven cents,
I recommend that you do, at least continue the present levy "of two cents upon each on hundred dollars worth of taxable property in the State" for the "New State House Fund," in addition to any appropriations you may see cause to make from the "General Fund."
Hon. Oliver P. Morton, our senior senator in Congress, died at his home in this city, November 1, 1877, worn out by a life of unusual activity in the public service. Thousands of our fellow citizens and many visitors from other states followed each other in solemn procession through the corridor of the building in which you are now met, viewing for the last time his familiar face as he lay in state, and afterwards accompanying his mortal remains to their resting place in Crown Hill Cemetery, near where he made his last public address to the people. Having filled a prominent place in the affairs of our state and country, his public life is familiar to the present generation and his acts have become a part of our history for the study of these who will come after us.
I appointed Hon. Daniel W. Voorhees to fill the office made vacant by his death. It will be your duty to elect a successor.
My views upon the question, of a reapportionment of the state for congressional and legislative purposes have been frequently expressed and were communicated at length to the last General Assembly. The districts for the election of members of congress are manifestly irregular in form and their population is out of due proportion to each other. The requirement that a senatorial or representative district, where constituted of more than one county, shall be composed of contiguous counties was literally fulfilled but, its spirit was grievously violated in essential features. Some of you have been elected by a voting population much less than the average while other have a constituency greatly in excess. I recommend the enactment of a just law in each case and such I will gladly approve. The auditor of state reports the enumeration necessary for your information in making the Apportionments.
While many of the older States were established upon "the town system," our own has grown up on the basis of "the county system," more suitable to the habits of our western people. The enabling act of April 19, 1816, recognized the thirteen existing counties, and they were represented in the convention forming our constitution. Ninety-two such subdivisions of our territory now exist, each for itself administering; important local affairs at great expense to the people. Our board of county commissioners is in legal contemplation the county, and as such is declared to be a body corporate and politic, and entrusted with large powers of a local administrative character. Prohibited from passing local or special laws regulating county and township business, the election of county and township officers and their compensation, the General Assembly has for many years tried in vain to reduce the county business to a simple, economical and uniform system. I wish you better success. Recently a commission of experienced gentlemen appointed by Marion county has given the subject careful study and reduced the results to a form suitable for your consideration.
Our laws fixing the compensation of officers were enacted when times were flush, when the necessaries of the were high and when labor received better compensation and was in greater demand than now. Therefore, I recommend a reduction of all fees and salaries in accordance with the times.
Our cities and towns should be reduced to a proper subordination to the counties of which they severally constitute parts. They are now almost independent of State supervision, and involve their citizens in needless expenses. The assessment and collection of their revenues alone, by one set of officers in a county would result in a great saving, and is recommended.
The statutes say that witnesses subpoenaed to testify in the county where they reside, shall not be entitled to demand and receive their fees m advance. I see that some gentlemen who had been subpoenaed to testify as expert witnesses in an important criminal trial in progress in this county recently, refused to testify unless fee were paid in advance. I can not see any good reason why one class of citizens shall be compelled to attend and testify under a penalty of fine and imprisonment, and another class embarrass the proceedings of a court because the party wanting their evidence is unable to pay them fees in advance. I recommend that you remedy this growing evil; for, if you have the right to pay or excuse one class, you have the right to pay or excuse all others in the same manner.
needs your careful consideration and wise legislation. Too much of the time or our Circuit Court is occupied with suits brought for small sums, especially by administrators, the costs of which equal the amount recovered. I recommend that you remedy this evil, and suggest the propriety of enlarging the jurisdiction of Justices of the peace so as to relieve the Circuit Courts of a great, deal of business of a frivolous nature involving no unsettled questions of law or practice. At the same time, you could perhaps relieve the Supreme Court in a great measure by a further limitation of its jurisdiction, and making judgments of certain cases final, without appeal therefrom. A speedy and economical administration of justice is demanded by the times.
Unnecessary delay has occurred for many years in publishing and circulating
the laws and thereby putting them in force, and in printing and distributing
the journals. I respectfully suggest that you provide for the printing of the
journals at the close of each day's proceedings that they may be
carefully inspected and corrected the next morning by the members, thus
securing accuracy promptness and a great saving in the work and expense, and
keeping yourselves and the people advised of the progress of your business.
The acts should be printed in the order of their enactment, and the financial
statements being ready and appended, they could be given to the people at an
early day after your adjournment
The reports of the treasury department are full and complete. The last Legislature reduced the state tax from thirteen to twelve cents on the one hundred dollars. The proceeds of that levy with delinquent taxes, docket fees and taxes otherwise collected and amounts reimbursed by counties and received to defray the expenses of the several departments and institutions in whose favor appropriations were made. I trust the same amount will be sufficient to pay the expenses for the next two years. It is not the State taxes but the county and township taxes and fees of officers that oppress the people. They are double and in many instances three times that of the state.
The receipts and disbursements each include the two hundred thousand dollars of temporary loan falling due April 1 and renewed.
The treasury statement for the month ending December 31, 1878 shows the balance at that date of general fund in the sum of $636, 321.78
The public debt was at the close of the fiscal year $4,998,178.34, having been reduced in the sum of $4,360. Of this $1,093,395.12 is "foreign," and $3,904,783.22 "domestic," being evidenced by five non-negotiable bonds held by the school fund.
The total value of the taxable property was:
The total number of taxable polls was:
Having through your committees gained information as to the correctness of the auditor's detailed estimates of the expenditures to be defrayed from the treasury for the ensuing two years and the resources of a miscellaneous nature, it should be the work of but a few days to prepare and pass bills for appropriation laws and for a law fixing the rate of taxation and for renewing temporary loans.
I sincerely hope that, realizing the limited term for which you are convened, you may be able at an early day to consider the matters communicated to you; and that your most important business may not be delayed until the confusion incident to the closing hours of the session shall involve you in errors which you will afterwards regret.
When the reading of the message was concluded -
The LIEUTENANT GOVERNOR declared the joint convention adjourned
When the Senators had retired -
Mr. TULLY offered a resolution, which was adopted, that the governor's message be referred to the Committee of the Whole, and be made a special order for Monday at 2 o'clock p.m.
Mr. GORDON offered a resolution that 200 copies of the message, together with 200 copies of the farewell address of General George Washington, be printed for the use of the House.
Mr. LEHMAN moved to amend by striking out so much of the resolution as relates to the address of General George Washington.
After considerable humorous debate across the House, under an imminent demand for the previous question, Mr. Gordon accepted the amendment of Mr. Lehman.
Mr. WILLARD moved to further amend by ordering 1,000 copies to be printed in the English language and 500 in the German.
Pending the consideration of this amendment.
The House adjourned
The secretary's minutes of Friday's proceedings were read and approved.
The LIEUTENANT GOVERNOR laid before the Senate a communication from the governor appointing SAMUEL R. DOWNEY executive officer to make and transmit executive communications to the Senate.
The LIEUTENANT GOVERNOR announced the regular standing committees of the Senate as follows:
The LIEUTENANT GOVERNOR also announced the following joint standing committees on the part of the Senate:
Mr. COFFEY presented a petition from Bartholomew County in favor of the bill creating
the Ninth, Tenth and Forty-third Judicial districts, which was referred to the
Mr. GRUBBS offered a resolution, which was
Mr. REEVE offered a resolution, which was adopted, requiring the librarian to report the names of senators who have received and receipted for copies of the revised statutes, and the price to be paid for the same.
The following described bills were introduced, read the first time and referred to appropriate committees, unless otherwise stated:
By Mr. WOODS, [S. 26] to declare swamp land deeds and records thereof evidence, etc.
By Mr. WINTERBOTHAM, [S. 27] to provide for the government of State's prisons.
By Mr. DAVENPORT, [S. 28] to provide for the liability of married women on contracts for work done on their real estate.
By Mr. SHIRK, [S. 29] to amend section 8 of the'common school law - funds to be loaned at six per cent.
By Mr. WIER, [S. 30] authorizing guardians to settle the estate of deceased wards.
By Mr. FOSTER, [S. 31]; relating to interest on money - six per cent.
By Mr. VIEHE, [S. 32] to allow the
By Mr. COMSTOCK, [S. 33] to amend the township election law - all township officers to be elected on the second Tuesday of October, 1880, and every second year thereafter.
By Mr. GRUBBS, [S. 34] providing for voluntary assignments by insolvents for the benefit of their creditors.
By Mr. WOOLLEN, [S. 35] dividing the State into congressional districts. Referred to a special committee to be appointed by the chair, one from each congressional district.
By Mr. OLDS, [S 36] to exempt, property from sale in certain Gases [homestead of 500].
By Mr. WIER, [S. 37] to enable county commissioners to dispose of orders and allowances uncalled for for the period of five years.
And then came a recess till 2 o'clock.
By Mr. TRUSLER, [S. 38] regulating the advertising and letting of contracts for the building of bridges.
By Mr. SHAFFER. [S. 39] relative to changing of proposed lines and termini of railroads.
By Mr. KENT, [S. 40] to amend sec. 1 of the exemption law - exempting 500.
By Mr. DAVENPORT, [S. 41] to reduce the fees of county officers [sheriffs to receive three-fourths - other county officers one-half - the fees now avowed by law].
By Mr. MOORE, [S. 42] for the protection of execution plaintiffs and purchasers at sheriffs' sales.
By Mr. KAHLO, [S. 43] to exempt the wages of laborers from garnisheement.
By Mr. WOODS, [S. 44] to empower cities and towns to collect license from saloon keepers where intoxicating liquors are sold.
By Mr.PETERSON, [S. 45]; requiring township trustees to levy a tax for a fund that has been used for another, where money has been taken from one and used for another.
By Mr. SHIRK, [S. 46] regulating interest on money--not exceeding 8 per cent. on contract, otherwise 6 per cent.
By Mr. WIER, [S. 47] to amend sec. 12 of the reclamation of swamp land act of March 9, 1875.
By Mr.KRAMER, [S.48] to protect the people from empiricism and imposition in the practice of medicine and surgery, and providing for the appointment [by judge of the Circuit Court] of a board of examiners in each county,
By Mr. POINDEXTER, [S. 49] to prevent the running at large of domestic animals,
By Mr. VIEHE, [S. 50] amending section 30 of the justices' act of June 9, 1852.
By Mr. MENZIES, [S. 51] changing time of Circuit Court in the Eleventh Judicial District. On his motion the constitutional restriction (requiring all bills to be read in three separate days) was dispensed with by yeas, 39; nays, 7, and the bill was read the second and third times and finally passed the Senate by yeas, 45; nays,0.
By Mr. COFFEY, [S. 52] repealing the act of March 9, 1861, providing for struck juries.
By Mr. WOOLLEN, [S. 53] to amend section 94 of the property assessment act of December 21, 1872.
By Mr. WINTERBOTHAM, [S. 54] to apportion the state for senatorial and representative purposes.
By Mr. GARRIGUS, [S. 55] to legalize the Kokomo Building and Savings Association.
By Mr. KAHLO, [S. 56] amending sections 175 and 176 of the general practice act of June 18 1872.
By Mr. HARRIS, [S. 57] concerning work houses. [In counties of blank populate commissioners may erect] Also, [S. 58] concerning prisons and jails - [commissioners may require prisoners to work on public improvements.]
By Mr. GRUBBS, [S. 59] to amend sec. 22 of the town incorporation act, of June 11, 1852.
By Mr. WILSON, [S. 60] to amend sees. 6,7, 44 and 45 of the circuit court act of March 6th 1873.
By Mr. COFFEY, [S. 61] to amend sec. 4 of the sheriff election act, of June 7,1852.
By Mr. COMSTOCK, [S. 62] to amend sec. 2 of an act to amend sec. 2 of an act to secure duel from private corporations, etc., approved February 25, 1859, approved March 13, 1875. [Stockholders shall be individually responsible to an amount over and above their stock equal to their respective shares of stock.]
Pending the introduction of bills--
Mr. VIEHE offered a resolution, which was adopted, authorizing the appointment of a committee of thirteen--one from each congressional district, to which all bills on the subject of congressional and legislative apportionment shall be referred.
The LIEUTENANT GOVERNOR laid before the Senate the following communication from the governor:
During the session of the General Assembly I will be in waiting at this place to receive any communication which the Senate may desire to make to me, and to confer with any of its committees, or individual members except during the morning hours, when occupied with business at my rooms in the State building, or unavoidably detained by other engagements.
To the President of the Senate.
Mr. BURRELL, from the special committee thereon, reported that the services of Rev. W. B. TREAT [senator from the Counties of Monroe and Lawrence] had been secured to open tomorrow's session with prayer, and Rev WM. ALVIN BARTLETT [pastor of the Second Presbyterian Church of this city] for the remainder of the week.
The LIEUTENANT GOVERNOR appointed as members of the
The Senate adjourned till to-morrow.
The House met pursuant to adjournment.
The SPEAKER called the House to order, and Rev, Dr. Bayliss opened the session with prayer.
The reading of the minutes of last Friday was proceeded with when--
On the motion of Mr. SHUTT, further reading way dispensed with.
The SPEAKER, announced the unfinished business pending at the adjournment last Friday, being an amendment to Mr. Gordon's motion to print the governor's message.
Mr. WILLARD offered a substitute that 3,003 copies be printed, 1,000 in the German language, upon which motion he demanded the previous question.
Mr. GORDON made an ineffectual request for Mr. Willard to withdraw his demand.
The demand for the previous question was seconded by yeas 54, nays 38, and the main question ordered by yeas 57, nays 36.
Mr. GORDON moved to reconsider the vote just taken, and desired to be heard on that motion.
The SPEAKER ruled the motion out of order, as the House was still working under the operation of the previous question.
The substitute was then adopted--yeas 59, nays 34.
Mr. HUMPHREY, from the select committee, then reported rules for the government of the House of Representatives.
The rules as reported, alter amendment, were adopted, and 200 copies ordered printed, with the State Constitution and standing committees of the House of Representatives.
Mr. HEROD, from the select committee appointed to secure the attendance of ministers of the Gospel to open each day's session with prayer, reported that they had discharged that duty.
Mr. DAILEY introduced a bill [H. R. 47] for an act to enable the owners of wet lands to drain the same, which was read the first time
The SPEAKER here announced the regular Standing committees of the House, as follows:
The speaker also announced the following joint standing committees on the part of the House of Representatives:
Mr. WILLARD submitted a protest against his assignment to the chairmanship of the
The SPEAKER disclaimed any intention to be unjust to any member on the floor in the appointment of the standing committees of the House, and, in order to avoid that, had invited members to consult freely with him in reference to making up the list.
The call by counties for bills and resolutions then proceeded,
The following described bills were introduced, read the first time and passed to a second reading
By Mr. DAILEY, [H. R. 48] fixing the time when actions shall stand for trial in the circuit courts.
By Mr. DAILEY, [H. R. 49] to provide for township elections.
By Mr. COMPTON, [H. R. 50] declaring agreements to pay attorney fees in any bill of exchange, acceptance, draft, note or other evidence of indebtedness illegal.
By Mr. STUCKER, [H. R. 51] to abolish the office of county school superintendent, and to appoint a school examiner.
By Mr. STUCKER, [H. R. 52] to amend an act in relation to highways.
By Mr. STUCKER, [H. R. 53] to amend an act defining who shall be competent witnesses in court.
By Mr. SCHOLL, [H. R. 54] to redistrict the State, and fixing the number of members of the General Assembly.
By Mr. CALDWELL, [H. R. 55] to legalize the board of county commissioners in Clinton County.
By Mr. TAYLOR of Daviess, [H. R. 56] defining the 10th, 12th and 3d judicial circuit.
By Mr. DONNELL, [H. R. 57] to legalise sheriff's sales.
By Mr. MARSH, [H. R. 58] to amend an act declaring attorney's fees in bills of exchange, notes, etc., illegal.
By Mr. MARSH, [H. R. 59] providing for appeals from boards of county commissioners.
By Mr. WILLARD, [H. R. 60] to incorporate the Orphan's Home, of New Albany.
By Mr. CONNOWAY, [H. R. 61] concerning interest on money [6 per cent.]
By Mr. DAVIDSON, [H. R. 62] to amend an act for the organization of county boards, and prescribing some of their duties.
By Mr. DAVIDSON, [H. R. 63] to amend an act in relation to county treasurers.
By Mr. DAVIDSON, [H. R. 64] to provide for working and repairing the public highways, abolishing the office of supervisor, etc.
Mr. STUCKER offered a resolution, which was adopted, calling for a report by itemized statement of purchases of supplies for and cost per capita of Inmates of the benevolent institutions and prisons of the State.
Mr. STUCKER offered a joint resolution [H. R. 1] instructing senators and requesting representatives in Congress to support an act to repeal and modify certain portions of the navigation and traffic laws, to aid the commerce and trade of the United Slates and reduce ocean freights.
On the motion of Mr. OVERMEYER it was referred to the
Mr. SHUTT offered a resolution, which was rejected, authorizing the appointment of additional doorkeepers.
On motion of Mr. WILLARD the papers contesting the seat of Mr. Bearss, a representative
from the county of Miami, were referred to the
On the motion of Mr. GORDON all contested election papers were referred to the same committee.
And then the House adjourned until to-morrow at 9 o'clock a. m.
The session was opened with prayer (for the first time) by Elder W. B. F. TREAT, a senator from the counties of Monroe and Lawrence, in the following words:
Oh, God, the ever living King and Inhabitant of eternity, the Creator and Preserver of all men, we thank Thee for life and health; for civil and religious liberty, and for a goodly inheritance in this goodly land. We now ask Thy blessings and favor upon the deliberations of this assembly. Enable us all to act in justice toward all, and as it is given us to see the right; and all praise and honor and glory shall be Thine forever and ever. Amen.
Mr. HARRIS offered a resolution which was adopted, requiring the Secretary of State to report what interest the State has, if any, in a certain house and lot in Southport, Marion County, Indiana, [bought by the State in 1862 an account of a debt to the school fund]
Mr. DAVENPORT offered a resolution which was adopted, directing the appointment of a committee of five to prepare suitable resolutions of respect to the memory of Hon. Charles Beardsley, late senator from the County of Elkhart.
The LIEUTENANT GOVERNOR made this committee to consist of Messrs. Davenport, Weir, Harris, Hefron and Fowler.
Mr. DICE offered a resolution, which was adopted, directing the
Mr. TAYLOR introduced a joint resolution [S. 2] for the appointment of a commission to
ascertain what amount of money has been realized as the proceeds from the sale of swamp
lands in Tipton County. Which was read the first time and referred to the
On motion of Mr. SARNIGHAUSEN the Senate resolved itself a committee of the whole - Mr. Hefron in the chair--for the consideration of the governor's biennial message to this General Assembly. On his further motion the different portions of the message were referred to the appropriate standing committees of the Senate. When the committee arose and reported progress, as just indicated, the report was concurred in; and so the governor's message was referred to the appropriate committees.
The following described bills were introduced, read the first time and referred to appropriate committees:
By Mr. GRUBBS, [S. 65] defining libel, and to prevent the publication thereof a misdemeanor punishable by fine not to exceed. $1,000, to which may be added imprisonment.
By Mr. REEVE, [S. 66] a bill for an act to provide for more speedy and efficient discharge of the labor and business in the Supreme Court, and enable the judges thereof to devote more time to the consideration of legal questions, and relieve them of the mere clerkly labor now required of them in the discharge of their duties, by providing clerks for [each of] said judges, fixing compensation for such clerks, and other matters connected therewith.
By Mr. MENZIES, [S.67] to restrain certain animals from running at large.
By Mr. MAJOR [S. 68] concerning interest on money--6 per cent.
By Mr. SHIRK, [S. 69] to provide for the organization and support of an asylum for feeble minded children--near Knightstown.
By Mr. BRISCOE, [S. 70] to amend sec. 1 the execution sale redemption act of June 4, 1861 - may redeem in two years by paying purchase money, with 6 per cent.
By Mr. LEEPER, [S. 71] authorizing justices of the peace to require additional replevin bail where the same is insufficient.
By Mr. HART, [S. 72] to legalize the official acts of the board of trustees of the town of Boonville, Warriek County.
By Mr. MOORE, [S. 73] to declare that alien shall take real or personal property by devise or descent, the same as natives.
By Mr. FOWLEB, [S. 74] regulating the working of coal mines and authorizing liens
upon
By Mr. WOOD, [S. 75] to enable purchasers at sheriff's, commissioner's, mortgages or judgment creditors' sales to perfect title.
By Mr. FOSTER, [S.76] amending sections 81 and 82 of the general practice act of June 17, 1852, so that defendants in offenses punishable by imprisonment for life may challenge peremptorily twelve jurors [Sec. 81] and "Sec. 82. The prosecuting attorney in capital cases may challenge peremptorily ten jurors; in all other felony cases five jurors; in misdemeanor cases three jurors."
By Mr. CADWALLADER, [S. 77] by request, to amend section 354 of the general practice act of June 18, 1852, so it shall read: "The application for a new trial may be made at any time before the rendition of judgment, but if made after the rendition of judgment for any cause known prior thereto the application must be made at the term at which judgment was rendered."
By Mr. SHIRK, [S. 78] to amend section 366 of the general practice act of June 18, 1852, so it will read: Section 344. No particular form of exception is required. The objection must be stated with so much of the evidence as is necessary to explain it and no more, and the whole as briefly as possible; and when the evidence is reduced to writing by the court, or by any person under the direction of the court, all objections to the admission or exclusion of evidence, and all decisions and rulings of the court theron and all exceptions thereto, shall be noted and written down at the time, by the court or person taking down such evidence. And it shall be the duty of the judge of such court to attach his certificate thereto at the conclusion of such evidence, stating therein that the foregoing contains all the evidence given in the cause and the objections, rulings, decisions and exceptions thereto. And when so certified and signed by the judge shall be filed in the cause and be deemed a part of the record in such cause and have all the force and effect of a bill of exceptions.
Then came a recess till 2 o'clock.
By Mr. REEVE, by request [S. 79], to secure more efficient work and material in performance of contracts for public works, and to prohibit officials from being in any manner interested therein, other than as officials; prescribing penalties, declaring certain persons inelegible to State offices for violations of its provisions, and declaring an emergency, and other matters connected with public works.
By Mr.KRAMER,[S 80] abolishing certain offices in cities and towns - assessor, treasurer. Town marshal to be elected yearly.
By Mr. TRUSLER, [S. 81] relating to the rights of married women - removing all legal disabilities.
By Mr. DAVENPORT, [S. 82] amending section 7 of the fee and salary act of March 12, 1875--printers' fee for advertising per square of 280 ems. first insertion, 75 cents, each additional insertion 30 cents--no sheriff's sale to exceed six dollars.
By Mr LEEPER, [S. 83] to amend section 9 of the justices'act of June 9, 1852 - civil jurisdiction limited to their township.
By Mr. FOSTER, [S. 84] relating to the practice of medicine and surgery.
By Mr. FOWLER, [S. 85] to establish probate courts in all the counties of the State. One hundred and fifty copies were ordered printed.
By Mr. GARRIGUS, [S. 86] to amend section 9 of the amendment act to the common school law of March 8, 1873--at the discretion of the township trustee one or two Fridays in each month shall be devoted to model schools for the improvement of teachers.
By Mr. OLDS, [S. 87] requiring township town and city assessors to make a yearly enumeration of children; and repealing section 14 of the common school law of March 6, 1865.
By Mr. COMSTOCK, [S. 88] to establish probate courts in each and every county.
By Mr. WINTEBBOTHAM, [S. 89] to repeal the act of May 12,1869, for the organization of savings banks.
By Mr. RAGAN, [S. 90] to define what shall be the salary of governor - $4,000 per annum including house rent.
By Mr. MOORE, [S. 91] to amend section 456 of the general practice act of June 18,1852 - the plaintiff as often as he may direct may have reappraisement any time before the return of the execution,
By Mr. WILSON, [S. 92] to define and suppress tippling houses, to regulate the sale, barter and giving away of spirituous and malt liquors, wine and other intoxicating liquors, to punish public exhibitions of drunkenness, and to provide penalties for the violation of this act.
By Mr. RAGAN, [S. 93] touching foreign corporations - suit against such shall be brought in State instead of Federal Courts.
By Mr. WOOD, [S 94] limiting the height of hedge fences along the public highways and adjoining the lands of others--not higher than 4 1/2 feet.
By Mr. RAGAN, [S. 95] in relation to foreign corporations.
By Mr. GARRIGUS, [S. 96] to amend section 2 of the net-fixing the salaries of the judges of the several courts, approved March 10, 1873, so "that the salaries of the judges of the Circuit Courts in this State shall be $1,500 annually."
By Mr. GRUBBS,[S. 97] making the removing of the dead body of any deceased person from interment without the consent of such deceased person, or of his or her relatives, or by direction of the coroner, a felony.
By Mr. DAVENPORT, [S. 98] to amend section 51 of the Justice's act of June 9, 1853, so the jury shall be composed of six "an loss a less number be agreed upon by the parties."
By Mr. REEVE, [S. 99] to prevent the clouding of title to lands; providing for satisfaction of record in case of transcript from justices' dockets filed in circuit or other courts as alien on land, and relating to certificates of sale and deeds thereon, in case of judicial and administrative sales, and other matters connected therewith, repealing conflicting acts and declaring an emergency.
Pending the introduction of bills, on motion by Mr. HARRIS, the secretary of the Senate was sent to the office of secretary of state for the enrolled copies of the proposed nine amendments to the State Constitution adopted by the late General Assembly. Known as joint resolution Senate, numbered 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 1 7, 9 and 19. [They are printed on pages 159,160, 161,162, 163 of the acts of the regular session of 1877 and page 85 of the acts of the special session of 1877.
When the LIEUTENANT GOVERNOR announced that these enrolled amendments had been placed on his desk -
On motion of Mr. HARRIS, they were read the first time in their numerical order.
On motion by Mr. REEVE they were ordered to be read the 2nd time immediately after the reading of the secretary's minutes to-morrow morning.
Mr. VIEHE, of the committee appointed to procure rooms for the use of Senate
committees, stated that five rooms could be procured on the third floor of the Bates
House for $200, on the third floor of the Grand Hotel for $300, and one the first
floor of the Grand Hotel for $500; light, furniture and fuel included. The
On motion by Mr. MENZIES, the committee was granted further time to submit its report.
The Senate then adjourned.
The SPEAKER calling the House to order stated that Rev. Mr. LYNCH, of the M. E. Church, was present and would open the sessions with prayer every morning this week.
The SPEAKER then ordered the reading of the journal, which was proceeded with until -
On the motion of Mr. LEHMAN the further reading of the journal was dispensed with. He also took occasion to charge the committee on enrolled bills to be careful that the enrollment of each and every bill shall be done in a plain round hand writing.
An ineffectual motion was made to increase the
Mr. DAVIDSON introduced a resolution, which was adopted, declaring that no extra allowance be allowed any employe of this House,
The following described bills were introduced. read the first time, and passed to the second reading:
By Mr. CAREY, [H. R. 65] to create a State Board of Health.
A communication was received from His Excellency the Governor, naming SAMUEL R. DOWNEY official messenger. Also that His Excellency would be found during the afternoon of each day in room 57 of the Marion County court house.
By Mr. CAREY, [H. R. 66] for the creation of a Board of Medical Examiners.
By Mr. ARNOLD, [H. R. 67] defining body-snatching.
Mr. ARNOLD offered a resolution, which was adopted, that a
By Mr. LINDLEY, [H. R. 68] for an act allowing the debtor to deduct his bona fide indebtedness from his tax appraisement.
Mr. LINDLEY presented a petition from the citizens of Hamilton, praying for a reduction in fees and salaries of county and State officers. [Not to affect the officers elect.]
By Mr. HANDY, [H. R. 69] to amend an act regulating the granting of divorces, approved March 10, 1873.
By Mr. HANDY, [H. R. 70] to exempt certain small amounts of property - $200 - from taxation.
By Mr. SNODDY, [H. R. 71] to amend an act in relation to supervision of highways.
By Mr. SNODDY, a joint resolution [H. R. 2] instructing the
On the motion of Mr. 0VERMEYER it was referred to the
By Mr. HUBBARD, [H. R. 72] to regulate interest on money [8 per cent.]
By Mr. HUBBARD, [H. R. 73] to create an asylum for feeble minded children.
Mr. SAINT offered a resolution, which was adopted, calling upon the officers of the reformatory and benevolent institutions of the State to furnish this House with a detailed report of the number of employes and their salaries.
Mr. KIRKPATRICK offered the nine proposed amendments to the constitution as adopted by the last General Assembly, printed on pages 169, 160, 161, 162 and 166 of the act of the regular session of 1877, and on page 85 of the acts of the special session of 1877. They were read, and -
On motion of Mr. GORDON, they were made the special order for day after to-morrow at 2 o'clock p.m.
By Mr. OVERMYER, [H. R. 74] to establish a Board of Pardons, to consist of State officers. Also, [H. R. 75] to limit appeals to the Supreme Court - to six months. Also, a resolution which was adopted calling on the State Auditor for the amounts of money drawn on account of the State University, Purdue University and the State Normal School for the years 1875-7-8.
By Mr. LEHMAN, [H. R. 76] to amend the Justices' act of June 9,1852. Also, [H. R. 77] to amend the act prescribing the powers of Justices' approval May 9, 1852.
By Mr. BROWN of Jasper,[H. R. 78] concerning sending prisoners to jail in other counties,
By Mr. DALTON, [H. R. 79] concerning the assessment of real property.
By Mr. SHIELDS, [H. R. 80] to amend the general practice act of June 18, 1852.
Also, [H. R. 81] provising for assessing and taxing telegraph companies.
Also, [H. R. 82] in relation to foreign express companies declared common carriers. Also a resolution, which was adopted, requesting the committee on cities and towns to prepare and report a bill for revision of the town and city incorporation laws, Also a resolution,which was adopted, instructing the committee on agriculture to report a bill requiring owners of lands, having streams running through the same, to keep the stream clear of drift.
By Mr. CONNOR, [H. R. 83] providing for liens upon horses and other animals for taking care of the same. Also [H. R. 84] to encourage the planting and growing of forest trees. Also [H. R. 85] to regulate special contracts for labor. Also [H. R. 86] to regulate the sale of butter.
By Mr. GORDON, [H. R. 87] to repeal section 250 of an act to provide for a uniform assessment of property, and for the collection of taxes, approved December 21, 1872
By Mr. GORDON. [H. R. 88] to repeal an act defining vagrancies and other offences. Approved March 10, 1877.
And then came the recess for dinner.
The SPEAKER ordered the call by counties for the introduction of bills and resolutions,
The following described bills were introduced, read the first time, and passed to the second reading:
By Mr. GORDON, [H. R. 89] touching contempt of court.
By Mr. HEROD, [H. R. 90] defining libel.
By Mr. HEROD, [H. R. 91] concerning married women to hold property, sue and be sued the same as if unmarried.
By Mr. HEROD, [H. R. 92] limiting the time for actions against sureties [three years].
By Mr. HEROD, [H. R. 93] to provide for the assessment and taxing of any building or loan association.
My Mr. HEROD, [H. R. 94] to regulate the carrying of concealed weapons [county commissioners may grant permission for one year].
By Mr. HEROD. [H. R. 95] providing for indemnifying sheriffs, coroners or constables in the execution of any process upon property.
By Mr. HEROD, [H. R. 96] to amend sections 3 and 8 of an act regulating the inspection of petroleum,
By Mr. HEROD, [H. R. 97] to authorize justices of the peace to appoint constables.
By Mr. HEROD, [H. R. 98] to prevent the running at large of stock.
By Mr. HEROD, [H. R. 99] creating a council of pardon and commutation [the State officers to constitute the council.]
By Mr. HEROD, [H. R. 100] to secure inmates of insane asylums communication by letter, the same as other citizens, without their being subject to taxation by the superintendent
By Mr. HEROD, [H. R. 101] to authorize inquisitions at insanity.
Mr. ENGLISH offered a resolution, which was adopted, instructing the committee on cities and towns to prepare and report a bill that shall provide for the abolishment of certain city officers whose duty can be performed by county officers.
By Mr. ENGLISH, [H. R. 102] reducing and grading the fees of county clerks, sheriffs, auditors, recorders and treasurers.
By Mr. CONFER, [H. R. 103] to amend the 44th section of an act fixing the fees and salaries for officers named therein; approved March 12,1875.
By Mr. CONFER, [H. R. 104] to amend sections 1, 11 and 12 of an act to exempt property from sale in certain cases; approved February 17, 1852.
By Mr. CONFER, joint resolution [H. R. 3] instructing our senators and requesting our representatives in Congress to use their influence to place upon the free list quinine and the salts of morphine and the salts of iodine and resoublime.
The resolution was adopted - by yeas 80, nays 7.
By Mr. MIERS, [H. R. 105] to regulate the practice of dentistry.
By Mr. MIERS, [H. R. 106] to provide for the election of three special judges, and dividing the State into three special judicial districts.
By Mr. MIERS, [H. R. 107] to amend section 70 of an act to provide for the election of justice of the peace, and prescribing their jurisdiction, approved June 9, 1852.
By Mr. MIERS, [H. R. 108] in relation to contested elections.
Mr. REED offered a resolution, which was adopted, that the officers of this House report the number and names of all their employes.
By Mr. THOMPSON, [H. R. 109] to create the Forty-second Judicial Circuit, and providing for appointment of judge and prosecutor.
By Mr. THOMPSON, [H. R. 110] prohibiting supreme, circuit or other judges, clerks of criminal courts, justices of the peace, auditors, treasurers, sheriffs and their deputies from practicing law.
By Mr. HART, [H. R. 111] to discourage the keeping of useless and sheep killing dogs.
By Mr. OSBORNE of Elkhart, [H. R. 112] to provide for the election of trustees for the Insane, Blind, Deaf and Dumb Asylums.
By Mr. 0SBORNE of Elkhart, [H. R. 113] to provide for the compensation of county officers.
By Mr. OSBORNE of Elkhart, [H. R. 114] to legalize find make valid certain building, loan and saving associations, and to extend the time of organization.
By Mr. SCHWITZER, [H. R. 115] to amend sec. 1 of an act to provide for the observance of the Sabbath.
Mr. SCHWITZER offered a resolution, which was adopted, that a special committee of five be appointed to prepare and report a bill for the settlement of decedents' estates.
Also a resolution, which was adopted, setting forth that inasmuch as all business was embarrassed, etc., that the House should oppose all questions looking to an increase of taxes.
By Mr. MAJOR, [H. R. 116] prohibiting judgments being rendered upon contracts waiving valuation or appraisement laws, and prohibiting the sale of property on execution for less than two-thirds of the appraisement.
By Mr. MAJOR, [H. R. ll7] regulating the interest, on money.
By Mr. WORKS,[H. R. 118] to divide the State into judicial circuits
By Mr. WORKS, [H. R. 119] to amend sections 71 and 72 of an act in relation to justices of the peace.
By Mr. WORKS, [H. R. 120] concerning evidence to be given by defendant for libel or slander.
By Mr. ALLEN, [H. R. 121] in relation to foreign corporations holding mortgages.
By Mr. ALLEN [H. R. 122] to authorize cities and towns to sell bonds for the erection of school houses.
By Mr. ALLEN, [H. R. 123] disqualifying citizens of incorporated cities as electors for township trustees, and to render inelligible township trustees who are residents of any such city.
The SPEAKER made the
The House adjourned till 9 a. m. to-morrow.
The session was opened with prayer by Rev WILLIAM ALVIN BARTLETT, of the Second Presbyterian Church, of Indianapolis.
The LIEUTENANT GOVERNOR laid before the Senate a communication from his excellency, the
governor, upon the subject of the health of the public, which was referred to the
He also makes the committee to inspect the secretary's minutes to consist of Messrs. Grubbs, Tarlton, Viehe, Sarnighausen and Dice.
Mr. VIEHE, from the committee thereon, reported that five rooms for the use of the Senate committees can be had at the Bates House, on the third floor, for $200, and five rooms on the first floor of the Grand Hotel for $500, and five rooms on the third floor for $300, or three rooms on the first floor and two others when needed, in some other part of the house, for $200.
Mr. RAGAN submitted a supplementary report from the State librarian naming certain rooms in this building which the county commissioners tender for the use of Senate committees, leaving the matter of compensation to the generosity of the General Assembly.
Mr. FOWLER moved to recommit the reports with instructions to make further inquiry into this matter.
On motion by Mr. REEVE [supported by Mr. VIEHE and himself and opposed by Messrs. FOWLER, RAGAN and OLDS] the reports were recommitted, with instructions for the committee to contract for such rooms as it may select.
The Senate proceeded to the consideration Of the special order for this morning's hour, being the amendment to the State constitution proposed and adopted by the last General Assembly of Indiana, printed on pages 159, 160, l61, 162 and 163 of the acts of the regular session of 1877, and page 85 of the acts of the special session of 1877. They were severally read the second time, when -
Mr. BUBRELL moved to amend the first proposed amendment by striking out the following words: "If he shall have been duly registered according to law," being the last clause of said resolution.
The LIEUTENANT GOVERNOR ruled the amendment out of order on the ground that if a portion of the proposed constitutional amendment be stricken out, or amended in any way, it is no longer the same adopted by the last General Assembly, but a different one.
So these nine proposed amendments to the constitution were passed to the third reading on to-morrow.
Mr. BURRELL offered a resolution authorizing the appointment of a committee of seven to which shall be referred all propositions looking; to the reapportionment of the State for legislative purposes.
On motion by Mr. HARRIS, who objected to pressing a vote on it at this time, the resolution was laid on the table.
Mr. SARNIGHAUSEN offered a resolution, which was adopted, instructing the
The bill [S. 32 - Mr. Reeve's] authorizing a clerk for the Senate and a clerk for
the
On motion by Mr. REEVE the constitutional restriction was dispensed with--yeas, 41; nays, 2. The bill was read the third time and finally passed the Senate by--yeas, 41; nays, 3.
Mr. REEVE introduced a resolution instructing the Senate
Mr. WOOD made an ineffectual motion to refer the resolution to the
The resolution was adopted.
Then came the recess till 2 o'clock p. m.
The joint resolution [H. R. 12] instructing senators and requesting representatives in Congress to favor a law to place on the free list certain medicines - quinine, salts of morphia, and the salts of and iodine resublimed - coming up in regular order, it was read the first time.
Mr. REEVE moved its adoption.
Mr. DICE moved to amend by referring the joint resolution to the
Messrs. REEVE and WOOLLEN opposed the reference and favored immediate action.
Messrs. DICE and STREIGHT deemed haste in this matter unnecessary. The latter was of opinion that the whole subject of free trade is involved in this measure. He doubted if any senator was prepared to say whether Peruvian hark, which is the basis of quinine, is imported free. If it is, and the importation of quinine is made free, the manufacture of quinine in this country is rendered almost impossible. He thought the resolution should be ferred to the committee indicated in the pending motion.
Mr. REEVE trusted senators would recognize the fact that this measure is for the benefit of the whole country--a measure to relieve the suffering of this country from an overwhelming burden which is of no earthly use, except to enrich one single individual or firm who possess the secret for the crystalization of Peruvian bark. Quinine enters more largely into the absolute necessities for the relief of the sufferings of the people than any other article manufactured, except alcohol.
The motion to refer was rejected, and the question recurring on the adoption of the joint resolution--
Mr. RAGAN made the point of order that joint resolutions should be read by sections on three several days in each house as in the case of bills.
The LIEUTENANT GOVERNOR was not very clear that the point of order is well taken. He thought it best to rule that way on the passage of the joint resolutions proposing amendments to the constitution, but never knew and never saw a man who did know whether the constitution requires joint resolutions to be read three times or not.
The joint resolution was then passed the Senate by--yeas 41, nays 4.
Mr. RAGAN offered a resolution declaring that the Senate will vote no extra compensation to any person or persons for any service, except upon a majority vote of yeas and nays.
Mr. TRUSLER moved to strike out all after the word "service."
Mr. FOWLER offered a substitute requiring such allowances to be made by bill or concurrent resolution.
On motion the whole subject was laid on the table.
Mr. STREIGHT offered a concurrent resolution instructing our senators and requesting our representatives in Congress to favor the bill now pending in the Federal Legislature relating to inter-State commerce.
On his motion it was made a special order for Friday at 2 o'clock p. m.
The following described bills for acts were introduced, read the first time, and referred to appropriate committees:
By Mr. KENT [S. 100], regulating the number and qualifications of grand jurors and the manner of their election--three freeholders and voters to be selected from 24 named by county commissioners--eight from each commissioner's district.
By Mr. SARNIGHAUSEN, [S. 101] to repeat the act of March 6, 1865, authorizing the formation of companies for the construction of water works in cities.
By Mr. MENZIES, [S. 102] regulating the manner of giving notice of sales of real estate made on order of courts--20 days successively before day of sale--by posting five notices in the county and three in the township.
By Mr. FOSTER, [S. 103] to authorize cities to construct and maintain and operate water works, and issue and sell bonds to pay for such construction, repealing all laws in conflict therewith, and declaring an emergency. Two hundred copies were ordered printed.
By Mr. WOOD, [S. 104] to repeal the act of December 14, 1872, enabling counties bordering on state lines or rivers to aid in the construction of railroads; also to repeal the railroad aid act of May 12,1869.
By Mr. FOWLER, [S. 105] requiring vendors of real estate, who desire to retain a lien on the same for unpaid purchase money, to take a mortgage and record the same.
By Mr. CADWALLADER, [S. 106] to amend the first and second sections of an act concerning interest on money, approved March 9,1867, so as to make the legal rate of interest six per cent.--on contracts, eight per cent.
On motion by Mr. HARRIS his bill, [S. 1] heretofore read by title only, providing
for assessing and appraising property for taxation, was read the first time and
referred to the
By Mr. HART, [S. 107] to abolish the office of county school superintendent, and to provide for the appointment of a county school examiner instead.
Mr. VIEHE, from the special committee to procure rooms for the use of the committees of the Senate, reported a contract with the proprietor of the Grand Hotel for rooms numbered 3, 22; 26, 93 and l0l--the five rooms for $200. The report was accepted, and the committee discharged.
Mr. DAVENPORT, from the special committee thereon, submitted the following:
Resolved, That the Senate contemplates the death of Hon. Charles Beardsley, late senator from the county of Elkhart, with profound sorrow.
Resolved, That in his death the State has lost a worthy citizen and a faithful and able senator, whose public and private virtues have endeared his memory to all.
Resolved, That the senators, whoso pleasure it was to serve with him in this body during the last session, cherish the memory of their late brother as one who guided only by his love of justice and right, won the esteem and confidence of every one.
Resolved, That as a testimony of our respect to the memory of our brother, the Senate do now adjourn.
Eulogies on the character of the late senator [Mr. BBARDSLEY] were pronounced by Messrs. TREAT, HARRIS, HEFRON and REEVE.
Mr TREAT said: Mr. President--I was intimately acquainted with Senator Beardsley,
It was my good fortune to secure his companionship during the session of 1877. He
was a quiet and unobtrusive man: but a man of great firmness and moral courage. As a
friend; he was kind and courteous; as a senator, he was conscientious, clear-headed,
fearless and faithful. While he seldom addressed the chair, yet he was always at his
desk, and took an intelligent survey of all business before the Senate. He was a
member, during the session of 1877, of the
On motion of Mr. SARNIGHAUSEN the resolutions were adopted by a rising vote.
In accordance with the terms of the last resolution--
The LIEUTENANT GOVERNOR declared the Senate adjourned.
The SPEAKER called the House to order, and Rev. T. H. LYNCH, presiding elder of the M. E. Church for this district, opened the session with prayer.
The reading of the journal was ordered and proceeded with until--
On the motion of Mr. HEROD the further reading was dispensed with.
The SPEAKER ordered the call by counties for resolutions and bills to be continued where It was left off on yesterday.
The following described bills for acts were introduced, read the first time and passed to the second reading.
By Mr. ALLEN, [H. R. 124] touching the duties of township trustee [to levy a special tax to defray the expenses of his office]. Also, [H. R. 125] regulating the interest on money [six per cent]. Also, [H. R. 126] in relation to foreign corporations.
By Mr. WATSON, [H. R. 127] to exempt a homestead from forced sale [40 acres and improvements, or two lots in town or city not to exceed $2,000 in value]. Also, [H. R. 128] relating to the bonds of administrators or guardians.
By Mr. FAULKNER, [H. R. 129] to amend sections 3 and 5 of an act to provide for the more speedy trial, of causes in the courts of this State, approved March 7, 3872. Also, [H. R. 130] to amend section 2 of an act to fix the salaries of judges or circuit, courts [$1,500.] Also, a resolution, which was adopted, requiting the auditor of state to furnish a tabulated statement of all moneys paid to judges, sheriffs [for transportation of prisoners, hack hire, etc.], and other officials.
By Mr. SLEETH, [H. R. 131] to amend the general practice act. Also, [H. R. 132] to amend the act prescibing the duties
of administrators--preference to be given the widow and next of kin. Also, a
resolution, which was adopted, that the
Mr. BRIGGS presented a petition from citizens of Sullivan County, which was referred
to the
Mr. VANPELT offered a resolution, which was adopted, directing the secretary of state to furnish the standing committees of the House with stationery, upon the order of the chairmen,
By Mr. BARKER, [H. R. 137] concerning the rights of married women.
Mr. OSBORN of Vermillion offered a resolution directing the
Mr. OSBORN, of Elkhart, moved to lay it on the table.
The motion was agreed to by--yeas 48, nays 46. So the reeolution lies on the table.
By Mr GAROUTTE, [H. R. 138] requiring, township trustees to appropriate any surplus funds now on hand to the benefit of the road.
By Mr. VAN VALZAH, [H. R. 139] to change the time when city taxes shall become a
lien--the first day of April. Also, [H. R. 140] to legalize the annexation of land to
cities and towns. Also, a claim for $1,183 23, which was referred to the
Mr ARNOLD offered a resolution directing the
It was adopted by--yeas 32, nays 30.
By Mr. TAYLOR of Warwick, [H. R. 141]to legalize the acts of the board of trustees of the town of Boonville.
By Mr. MITCHELL, [H. R. 142] to fix and regulate the salaries of county officers.
Also, [H. R. 143] to divide the state into congressional districts. Also, a
resolution, which was adopted, Instructing the
By Mr. OWEN, [H. R. 144] providing for .the collection of damages sustained or growing out of the sale of intoxicating liquors from the seller and the owner of the building in which it is sold. Also, [H. R. 145] regulating the sale of intoxicating liquors--the several townships to vote for or against licensing the sale thereof--at April elections.
By Mr. TULLY, [H. R. 146] to regulate the listing of progeny for taxation--bona fide indebtedness to be deducted. Also, [H. R. 147] to enable married women, whose husbands are insane, to hold a certain amount of property exempt from taxes. Also, [H. R. 148] to legalize and make valid the sale of real estate in certain cases. Also, [H. R. 149] regulating in- terest on money--6 per cent.
Mr. CAMPBELL--detained by sickness--by Mr Gordon[H. R. 150] legalizing the annexation of certain lands to the city of Logansport.
Appointments of committee clerks were reported to wit: For the first group of committees,C C. Worreil; for the second group, Charles Shank: for the third group, John Graham.
The SPEAKER laid before the House a communication from the state librarian, setting forth the tender by the Marion County commissioners of rooms in the new Court House for the use of the House of Representatives.
A lengthy communication from the governor on the subject of the health of the public was read, and--
On the motion of Mr. Osborne, of Elkart, the communication and accompanying papers
were referred to the
The bill [S.51] changing the time of holding courts in the eleventh judicial circuit
coming
Mr. Lehman's bill [H. R. 1] appropriating $120,000 for Legislative expenses was read the second time. On his motion, the Constitutional rule was suspended--yeas 90, nays 0--the bill considered as engrossed, read the third time and passed the House of Representatives--yeas 87, nays 1.
Mr. DALTON introduced a bill [H. R. 151] to enable mining or manufacturing corporations of other State to purchase and convey real estate in this State, which was read the first time.
Mr. Davidson's 6 per cent interest bill [H. R. 2] was read the second time.
Mr. English's assessment of real property bill [H. R. 3] was read the second time.
The House then look a recess till 2 o'clock p.m.
The speaker resumed at 2 o'clock.
Mr OSBORNE of Elkhart, called up the Special order for this hour, toeing the consideration of the Governor's message.
The HOUSE than resolved itself into a
The different portions of the message were referred to appropriate committees, when the committee rose and reported progress.
The report was concurred in, and so the message was referred to the appropriate committees of the House.
Notice was given of the withdrawal of the papers in the contested case of Geo. W. Gibson for the seat of James T. Arnold, from the counties of Grant and Blackford.
The following described bills were read the second time and referred to appropriate committees:
Mr. Steven's bill [H. R. 5] regulating the number of grand jurors. Also his appraisement of real estate bill [H. R. 6].
Mr. Compton's working of coal mines bill [H. R. 7].
Mr. Caldwell's interest bill [H. R. 8].
Mr. Steven's corner stone bill [H. R. 9].
Mr. Reed's bill, [H. R. 10] exempting the Claims of wives, children, etc., of charitable associations.
Mr. Hess' gravel road amendment bill,[H. R. 11]
Mr. Shields' bill, [H. R. 12] legalizing the acts of the council of the city of Seymour.
Mr. LAYMAN (by consent), from the special committee appointed to secure committee rooms, reported that the rooms in this court house were too large and inconvenient, and that the committee had a proposition from the proprietor of the Grand Hotel to furnish five rooms, warmed and cleaned for $185 during the session. Also a proposition from Woodward's European Hotel to furnish six rooms in suit, furnished, gas, janitor, etc., for the sum of $180 during the session.
Mr. MIERS moved that the House accept the offer of the proprietors of the Grand Hotel.
Mr. LEHMAN moved to amend the motion by striking out the word "Grand" and inserting, in lieu, "Woodward's European Hotel," which was rejected by-yeas, 24; nays, 68.
The proposition of the Grand Hotel was then accepted by a rising vote--yeas, 5; nays, 26.
Mr. OVERMEYER offered a resolution, which was adopted, that the janitor appointed for committee rooms in the new Court House be discharged.
The order of reading bills the second time proceeded:
Mr. Overmeyer's petit juror bill [H. R. 13].
Mr. Reed's public cemetery bill [H. R. 14].
Mr. Lenman's [H. R. 15], to legalize the Board of Trustees of the town of Edinburgh.
Mr. Steven' [H. R. 16], defining what property shall be taxed for educational purposes.
Mr. Dalton's [H. R. 17], repealing the act permitting townships taking stock for the construction of railroads. Also his six per cent interest bill [H. R. 18].
Mr. Edwin's protection of fish bill [H. R. 19].
Mr. Connor's State bureau statistic and geology bill [H. R. 20]. Also his bill [H. R. 21] abolishing the office of township assessor. Also his homestead exemption bill [H. R. 22.]
Mr. Herod's bill [H. R. 23] to create the 43d judicial circuit.
Mr. English's bill [H. R. 24] regulating the indebtedness of counties having a
voting population of over 20,000. Also his representative apportionment bill [H. R.
25]. Also his bill [H. R. 28] providing for the appraisement of real estate, coming
up, on motion by Mr. WILLARD the constitutional restriction was dispensed with--yeas
88, nays 0. The bill was read the second time by title only, and referred to the
Mr. English's bill [H. R. 27] to fix the number of members of the General Assembly. Also his congressional apportionment bill [H. R. 28].
Mr. Work's bill[H. R. 29] relative to married women. Also his bill [H. R. 30] to amend, sec 8 of the act concerning the alienation of properly.
Mr. Allen's court practice act [H. R. 31]--
Were severally referred to appropriate committees.
The House adjourned.
After prayer by Rev. W. A. BARTLETT, of the Presbyterian Church, the minutes were being read when, on motion by Mr. HARRIS, their further reading was dispensed with.
The LIEUTENANT GOVERNOR announced the special order, being the nine proposed amendments to the State Constitution, as adopted by the last general assembly. The joint resolution embracing proposition No. 1 prescribing qualification of voters, being read--
Mr. BURRELL thought this joint resolution should not prevail. It adds another wheel to the machinery of government. There is a difference of opinion among lawyers as to Whether this would be a complete law, or Whether it would require additional legislation. If those amendments are submitted to the people for acceptance or rejection It will cost about $50,000. The simpler we can get a system of government that will protect the people in the enjoyment of life, liberty and property, the better.
Mr. WOOD read from manuscript a reply to an objection that this proposed amendment would be without force or effect unless the General Assembly enacts a registry law. He thought a good registry law should be enacted, and should vote for this amendment.
Mr. HARRIS said the action of the Legislature two years ago was taken without any reference to political complexion, and he hoped the matter of politics will not be taken Into consideration now. It is a matter very much to be desired that when an election Is held every citizen of the State shall be satisfied that the result shall be a fair, full and honest expression of the will of the people.
Mr. FOWLER thought if we needed anything under our system, it was a good, fair election law, and for that reason he favored this proposed amendment.
Mr. HEFRON having given this subject some thought and consideration, felt compelled to cast his vote against this amendment. Our present election law is good enough and strong enough and fair enough, if properly en forced.
Mr. GRUBBS answered objections raised against this amendment--giving it as his opinion that without the third proposed amendment, if ratified by the people, this one would not make it an imperative duty of the General Assembly to pass a registry law.
Mr. WOOLLEN could not favor this proposed amendment to the constitution. Some of its features are objectionable, especially the provision requiring a residence of 60 days in a town ship before a man is entitled to vote which would work a hardship to every man who is compelled to change his residence frequently in order to obtain employment.
Mr. REILEY two years ago voted against this amendment, and stood opposed to it still, simply from the fact that it requires every voter to reside in his voting precinct 60 days prior to the election, which provision would disfranchise hundreds and thousands of laboring men who are tenants. Had this amendment read 20 or 30 days, it would have received his support.
Mr. COFFEY opposed this proposed constitutional amendment, for the reason that many voters in this State are poor men who have no permanent abiding place, but are traveling from township to township and from county to county, and if this proposed amendment should become part of the organic law of the State it would result in the disfranchisement of numbers of this class of our voters.
Mr. TRUSLER supposing there is not a senator upon this floor but what has made up his mind as to how he will vote, demanded the previous question.
Mr. REEVE hoped no senator would vote to second the demand for the previous question on the adoption of a fundamental law. It is a thing unheard of.
Mr. TRUSLER would withdraw his demand if there are any who think they can convince us of our errors.
Mr. STREIGHT: This proposed constitutional provision seems so perfectly fair and o
necessary, in the face of the history of our State elections, it would seem there could
hardly be any opposition raised to it. It is an
Mr. REEVE: This is a deliberative body. It is not a caucus nor a political convention. It exercises the highest powers and occupies the most responsible position that it is possible to confer upon man. It is one of the results of a great, experiment that was began upon this continent over a century ago, under circumstances that astonished the civilized world. We sit here to day as a great inquest upon the very fundamental elements, which, carried into practice, give us government. We have no government in this country, except the law. We have no law, except that made under prescribed forms. The first prescribed form is the constitution. That constitution is the result of the deliberative judgment of the representatives of the people assembled in convention.
The right of suffrage in this country is too cheap--the rights of citizenship are not valued at their worth--dignity is taken from them, and it has become a mere gambler's trick to take into the dirty pool room of politics as a matter of speculation for power. American citizens dare not deny it, and they are too cowardly to meet and counteract its evil influences. [Applause.] It is not a question of Republicanism; it is not a question of Democracy; it is not a question of Nationalism, but it is a question of the maintenance of the right to civil liberty in this country. Mr. R. spoke at length in favor of the passage of the amendment under consideration as adopted, by the last General Assembly, expressing the opinion that the clause referring to a registry law was not mandatory, but simply left it discretionary with the General Assembly whether a registry law should be enacted or not.
A motion [Mr. Coffey's] to lay the joint resolution on the table was rejected by--yeas 12, nays 86, and a motion [Mr. Menzie's] to indefinitely postpone was laid on the table by--yeas 38, nays 11.
Mr. STREIGHT demanded the previous question, which was seconded--affirmative 33, negative 11--and under its operations the joint resolution [S. 1] as adopted by the last General Assembly was finally passed the Senate as printed on page 159, acts regular session of 1877--yeas 34, nays 15--as follows:
Those who voted in the affirmative were--Messrs. Cadwallader, Comstock, Davenport, Davis, Dice, Foster, Fowler, Garrigus, Grubbs, Harris, Heilman, Kahlo, Langdon, Majors, Mercer, Moore, Olds, Petersen, Poindexter, Ragan, Reeve, Sarnighausen, Shaffer, Shirk, Smith, Streigbt, Taylor, Treat. Trusler, Viehe, Wier, Wood, Wilson and Winterbotham--34.
Those who voted in the negative were--Messrs. Briscoe, Burrell, Coffey, Dunham, Hart, Heffron, Kent, Kramer, Leeper, Menzies, Riley, Tarlton, Traylor, Urmston and Woollen--15.
Then came a recess till 2 o'clock.
The joint resolution No. 2, proposing an amendment to the State constitution, as adopted by the last General Assembly, to strike from section 5, article 41, the words "no negro or mulatto shall have the right of suffrage," being read the third time it was passed the Senate by--yeas 43, nays 0.
The joint resolution proposing amendment No. 3 to the constitution, providing that general elections shall be held in November, on the first Tuesday after the first Monday and that judges may have a separate election day under a registration law, being read the third time--
Mr. BURRELL objected to this amendment because, instead of having our Judges go into office, as is now the case, without any expense or any obligation to the party which elects them, it would bring about such a state of tilings as would make it necessary that the candidates for the bench should defray all the expenses of the election held specially to make I a selection of judges.
Mr. MENZIES would vote for this proposed amendment but for the proviso referring to registration of voters. Experience has shown that registry laws do not prevent frauds in elections. Under our present law elections substantially reflect the will of a majority of the people. Every man is guided and impelled by 99 honest impulses where he is moved by one dishonest one. If this proposition left it discretionery with the Legislature to enact a registry law or not, it would be a different matter, but this thing of compelling the people to live under a registry law is the same as saying the people can not be trusted without a registry law.
Mr. LANGDON understood the latter clause of this provision to mean that if the Legislature does appoint a different time for the election of judges, then it shall provide a registry law suitable for that time. The people are I suffering from inexperienced and incompetent politicians on the bench of this State, and certainly the election of judges should be disassociated from politics as much as possible.
Mr. REEVE declared one of the strongest arguments that could be made in favor of a registry law is found in the objection that it will interfere with a class of men who now vote, but who, under a registry law, would be so utterly indifferent to the rights of citizenship and the great power and dignity and force of the elective franchise, that they are not willing to walk into a register's office and record their names as among those possessing that right. There may a time come when a man would give half his fortune for such a privilege. There may be a time and there has been a time when all the bones cemented by all the blood in this land could not buy it.
Mr. HEFRON said as a general rule judges are not known in an election campaign now when other candidates are targets for vituperation and abuse, but if you make the Judge alone a standard bearer in the fight you drive him into politics. Nobody will carry his tight forward for him, and he will be compelled to it. Mr. H. also opposed the registration clause. The greatest objection is the expensive machinery attaching to it. It would probably cost the people of Indiana $100,000, and they would not be benefitted one cant by the outlay.
Mr. OLDS considered the rejection by the Senate of this proposition would be in effect saying the voters of Indiana are incapable of passing upon this question. It does not follow if it is ratified by the people that there shall be a registry law passed. It yet remains for the Legislature to decide whether there shall be a registry law or not to govern the election of judges. There is nothing in it imperatively demanding either a separate election for judges or a general registration of voters.
Mr. HART did not believe it right to require men who work at daily labor and have to move from place to place to live in a township 60 days before acquiring the right to vote, and for that reason voted against the first amendment, but should vote for this one, believing it very desirable that our general elections should be held in November.
The third proposed amendment to the constitution, as adopted by the last General As
The proposed amendment to the constitution striking the word "white" from secs. 4 and 5 of art. IV was read the third time, and passed the Senate by--yeas 47, nays, 1.
The proposed amendment No. 5, making it possible for the General Assembly to grade the fees and salaries of county and other officers, was read the third time.
Mr. SARNIGHAUSEN: Under our present system we can not pass a fee and salary bill giving satisfaction to the people and doing justice to the officers. That has been tried time and again. We had a fee and salary bill in 1871, which was repealed in 73 and a new one passed. Then that was repealed in 1875 and a new one passed; and amendments and changes were made to this one in 1877. So long as you takes small counties for standard counties and give their officers a comfortable salary, you make the county officers in large counties to get rich; and if you take such counties as standard counties, the officers in small counties will starve. If you look into the statute books, before the adoption of our present constitution you will find that almost each township had a special law for fees and salaries. He favored the passage of the pending proposition, so as to enable the Legislature to pass laws classifying the counties into several groups, and making fees and salaries equitable.
Mr. BURRELL considered it better to leave the law as it is. It is nothing more than right that a man should be paid according to the labor to be performed and the responsibility resting upon him.
Mr. KENT was also decidedly opposed to the adoption of the pending amendment, because if it should become a part of the organic law, there may be passed a local act for every county in the State. It is true it provides for dividing the counties into groups, but the Legislature is to determine how many groups there shall be, and it may decide to have 92 groups. It would open the door to frauds. He opposed local legislation, and thought the adoption of this amendment would be pernicious.
Mr. STREIGHT referred to the fact that a number of offices in his [Marion] county were worth fifteen,twenty, twenty-five and even $30,000; and numbers of men in trying to obtain some one or more of these offices had sunk fortunes. It is customary when a man is nominated for one of these offices to expect an assessment of a sum of money that would astonish gentlemen were they to know the amount. If you want a fair, and honest expression of the people at the poles you must remove this great corrupting motive.
Mr. Fowler. If there is any question the people all over the State feel an interest in, it is this very question. This amendment will afford relief, Let us pass it, then grade the counties, and give each office a reasonable compensation.
Mr. KRAMER also favored this amendment. It will make it possible for the General Assembly to grade the counties as to make a just and equitable compensation to all officers--just to the officers and just to the people.
The amendment No. 5 was finally passed the Senate, as printed on page 161 of the acts of the regular session of 1877, by--yeas 47, nays 2.
The proposed amendment to the State Constitution, numbered 6,vesting power in the General Assembly to establish courts, was read the third time and finally passed the Senate, printed on page 162 of the acts of general session of 1877, by--yeas 46, nays 2.
The proposed constitutional amendment No. 7, in relation to the judges of the Supreme Court [five or seven--terms of service six years; three classes, so one-third may be chosen every two years] was read the third time, and finally passed the Senate as printed on pages 162 and 163, acts of regular session of 1877 by -- yeas 41, nays 7.
The amendment No. 9, proposed to the organic law of the State, to limit the indebtedness of political or municipal corporations, was read the third time, and finally passed the Senate as printed on the page 85, acts of special session of 1877, by--yeas 48, nays 0.
The joint resolution, No.19, proposing a constitution amendment No.10 to extend the length of Legislative sessions -- regular session 121 days, special session 60 days--being read the third time it was finally passed the Senate by --yeas 44, nays 5. Mr. Fowler explaining that he would vote against the proposition standing alone, but believing the people capable of determining the question for themselves, inasmuch as the other propositions are submitted with them, should vote " aye".
Mr. Taylor, from the committee charged with that service, reported rules from the government of the Senate, which were adopted. On his motion 200 copies were ordered printed, with a list of the standing committees of both Senate and House and their place of meeting, and the State constitution, and names of senators and their post office address.
And then the Senate adjourned.
The SPEAKER called the House to order; prayer was offered by Rev. S. J. GILLETT.
The Journal of yesterday was ordered read and the clerk proceeded to read until--
On the motion of Mr. EDWINS the further reading was dispensed with.
The SPEAKER then proceeded to the call by counties for resolution and bills.
The following described bills for acts were introduced, read the first time and passed to the second reading:
By Mr. COMPTON [H. R. 152] regulating interest on money, judgments, etc., [6 per cent.]
By Mr. STUCKER [H. R. 153] to abolish the office of county and township assessor. [Trustee ex-officio.]
By Mr. CALDWELL offered a resolution, which was adopted, instructing the
By Mr. DONNELL, [H. R. 155] declaring that aliens should not work a corruption of blood. Also [H. R. 156] to make executors plaintiffs same as strangers at sheriffs' sales.
By Mr. MARCH, [H. R. 157] to secure to married women all the avails of her skill. Also [H. R. 158] in relation to settlements made by boards of county commissioners with county, township and school officers. Also [H. R. 159] to secure homesteads to resident householders--[160 acres of land: in town 1 acre and improvements, $750 of personal property exempt.]
Mr. HART offered a joint resolution [H. R. 13] instructing our senators and requesting our representatives in Congress to use their influence of the passage of a law to reduce the salaries of Federal officers.
The resolution was referred to the
By Mr. STEVENS, [H. R. 160] to amend section 27 of an act regulating decedents' estates.
By Mr. WILLIARD, [H. R. 161] to amend section one of an act to exempt property from sale in certain cases. Also, [H. R. 162] providing in cases of assignment, labor performed within 12 months proceeding such an assignment shall be paid in full to any amount not exceeding $300.
By Mr. CONNOWAY, [H. R. 163] to amend section 307 of the general practice act. Also [H. R. 164] to amend sec. 199 of the general I practice act.
By Mr. DAVIDSON, [H. R. 165] defining the crime of conversion by attorneys and counsellors at law. Also [H. R. 166] to provide for the protection of wild game. Also [H. R. 167] to amend sec. 1 of an act to prevent hunting on inclosed lands.
By Mr. HUMPHREYS, [H. R. 168] to authorize cities and towns to issue bonds.
By Mr. LINDLEY, [H. R. 169] giving justices of the peace jurisdiction over all defendants in any suit upon a promissory note, where the principal defendant resides within the jurisdiction of said justice.
By Mr. HANDY, [H. R. 170] allowing interested parties to testify in their own behalf. Also, [H. R. 171] regulating interest on money. Also, [H. R. 172] declaring ineligibility of supervisors.
By Mr. HESS, [H. R. 173] authorizing justices of the peace to certify causes to the superior court in certain cases.
By Mr. GOLDEN, [H. R 174] to repeal section 2 of an act defining certain misdemeanors.
Mr. LEHMAN offered a resolution, which was adopted, that the clerk of this House prepare and have printed a complete calendar of business for the week, and lay the same upon the desks of members every Monday.
By Mr. SAINT [H. R. 175] regulating toll on plank, macadamized or gravel roads. Also [H. R. 176] to amend section 1 of an act to prevent property from sale on execution in certain cases[exemption $800].
By Mr. COPE LAND [H. R. 177] to authorize county commissioners to borrow money.
By Mr. FANOHER [H. R. 178] to amend section 674 of the General Practice act.
By Mr. CONNOR [H. R. 179] to prevent the manufacture and sale of adulterated fertilizers.
By Mr. CONNOR [H. R. 180] to prevent the destruction of baggage.
By Mr. ROBINSON, [H. R. 181] concerning interest on money.
Mr. GORDON offered a resolution, which was adopted, that the criminal laws of the State be referred to a special committee of not less than three nor more than seven; said committee to collate all bills on this subject and, if possible, to embody them in one bill, and report the same to this House.
Subsequently the SPEAKER made the committee to consist of Messrs. Gordon, Miers, Sleeth, Osborne of Elkhart, Saint, Briggs and March.
Mr. GORDON offered a resolution, which was adopted, calling upon the
By Mr. MAJOR, [H. R. 182] to exempt property from sale on execution in certain cases [real or personal $1,000]; also, [H. R. 183] concerning license in certain cases.
By Mr. WORKS [H. R. 184] to amend sec. 2 of an act defining who shall be competent witnesses.
By Mr. ALLEN [H. R. 185] to amend section 196 of the act for the assessment of property.
Mr. KELLY offered a resolution instructing the
Mr. SAINT moved to amend so as to include all persons over 21 years of age.
The yeas and nays were demanded on the amendment and being ordered and taken resulted--yeas, 48; nays, 36.
So the amendment was agreed to.
Motions were made to lay on the table, to indefinitely postpone and to adjourn, upon each of which the yeas and nays were demanded, ordered and taken.
And then the House took a recess until 2 o'clock.
The SPEAKER took the chair at 2 o'clock, stating the first thing in order to be the consideration of Mr. Kelley's resolution as amended.
On the motion of Mr. ENGLISH, the resolution was further amended so that the
The resolution as amended was then adopted.
Mr. LEHMAN called up the special order for this hour--being the consideration of the nine proposed constitutional amendments passed by the last General Assembly.
The House then resolved itself into
Upon the motion of Mr. HUMPHREYS, the Senate joint resolution amending section 2 of article 2 of the constitution, prescribing the qualification of voters, was read.
Mr. CAUTHORN having discovered some clerical errors, was having the same corrected, when--
On the motion of Mr. TAYLOR, of Daviess the committee rose, reported progress, and asked leave to sit again.
The SPEAKER resumed the call by counties for the introduction of
By Mr. BLOCKLEY, [H. R. 186] defining the meaning of the proviso in section--of the act approved.
Mr. TAYLOR, of Daviess, (by consent) offered a resolution, which was adopted, requesting the Secretary of State to certify the copies of the proposed amendments to the constitution by him transmitted to the House of Representatives.
By Mr. FAULKNER.[H. R. 188] to regulate fire insurance companies. Also [H. R. 189]
to provide for the assessment for taxation of the property of telegraph companies
Also a resolution, which was adopted, calling upon the
By Mr. VAWTER, [H. R. 190] for the relief of sufferers from the Morgan raid while in pursuit of the enemy.
By Mr. EDWINS, [H. R. 191] authorizing county auditors to take acknowledgement of deeds.
By Mr. SHUTT, [H. R. 192] to legalize the official acts of the officers the town of Butler, DeKalb County.
By Mr. TULLEY, [H. R. 193] to enable any surety to file cross complaints in any action thereon against the principal.
Mr. ARNOLD offered a resolution congratulating the country upon the resumption of specie payment.
On the motion of MR. WILLARD the resolution was referred to the
The bill[S. 32] authorizing clerks for both
the Senate and House
The bill [S. 51] fixing the time of holding court in the Eleventh Judicial Circuit
was read the first time and referred to the
The SPEAKER then called the attention of (he House to bills on their second reading, which were read and referred to appropriate committees, as follows:
Mr. Watson's prosecution of felonies bill [H. R. 32]. Also, his bill [H. R. 33] declaring the powers and duties of Justices of the Peace. Also, his bill [H. R. 35] to amend section sixty-four of an act providing for the election of justice of the peace, Also his bill to suppress tippling houses [H. R. 36]. Also his per diem and mileage bill [H. R. 37]. Also his bill [H. R. 38] to amend section 6 of an act providing for election of supervisors of highways. Also his bill [H. R. 40] to amend sections 3, 4,6 and 8 of an act to prescribe certain powers and duties of county and township officers,etc.
Mr. Baker's ineligibility-to-the-office-of-township-trustee bill [H. R. 41].
And then the House adjourned.
After prayer by Rev. Dr. BARTLETT, the secretary's minutes of yesterday's proceedings were read and approved.
Mr. HARRIS presented a protest, which, at his suggestion, was ordered placed upon the journal without reading. [It is a protest signed by Republican senators against the rulings of the lieutenant governor on the organization of the Senate.]
The
The
Mr. REEVE moved to concur in the report of the committee.
Mr. SHIRK, from the number of bills introduced here to reduce the legal rate of interest, was convinced that a reduction will be made at this session of the General Assembly, whether to six or eight per cent. is yet a question ; but it is evident there will be a reduction. It has been the policy of the Legislature to place the rate of interest on moneys belonging to the School fund a little below the legal rate of interest, because it is absolutely necessary to the welfare of the common school system that all moneys belonging to the school fund should be kept, out at interest continually. Our county auditors can not succeed in keeping the school fund out at interest as it ought to be unless they can loan it at a less rate of Interest than the legal rate. For these reasons he had introduced the bill, and hoped the bill would not be indefinitely postponed, but passed through the several readings and become a law.
Mr. REEVE could not remember the time when the rate of interest on the school fund was less than seven per cent, A loan from the school fund amounts to a perpetual loan as long as the borrower pays interest promptly, and where else can a man go and obtain a perpetual loan at six per cent.? At eight per cent. there are far more applicants than can be accommodated The legal rate of interest in this State is 6 per cent., and the General Assembly, in its wisdom and generosity, has given every man the privilege to exercise his own discretion as to his own wants and necessities in emergencies, and in the exercise of that discretion, if he thinks his interests, necessities or wants are such that by making a special contract in writing to pay a rate of interest not exceeding 10 per cent., he shall have that privilege; and any one who would deprive a business man or a poor man of the exercise of that discretion, carrying out the same principle, would deprive him of the discretion as to whether he shall own two horses or one, or two pups or one, or wear boots or shoes, or go barefoot. [Laughter.]
Mr. DICE: While the legal rate of interest is 6 per cent., and while the State has funds to loan to her people, it is inconsistent for her to charge 8 per cent., and it is wrong. This bill ought to pass in justice to the people.
On motion of Mr. LANGDON the motion to concur in the committee report was laid on the table.
The
Mr. KRAMER offered a resolution, which was adopted, directing the clerks of the Senate committees not to employ a janitor.
Mr. WOOLLEN offered a resolution, which was adopted, directing the
On motion by Mr. SARNIGHAUSEN it was adored that 1,000 copies of the governor's message, together with the accompanying communications on sanitary purposes, be printed in English and 500 copies in German, for the use of the Senate.
Mr. DAVENPORT, by request, offered a joint resolution [S. 3] instructing our senators and requesting our representatives in Congress to favor the passage of the arrears of pensions bill and the bill for the equalization of bounties to soldiers in the late war, which was adopted-- by yeas 47, nays 0.
Mr. WINTERBOTHAM offered a joint resolution [S. 4] for instruction and request to Indiana senators and representatives in Congress to use their influence to procure a modification of the patent laws.
Mr. WINTERBOTHAM introduces this resolution to prevent the people from being imposed upon by many men who claim and obtain patents where no real principle is involved and levy blackmail upon the people. The driven well principle has been known for centuries, and yet men get a patent on it and proceed to levy blackmail by claiming from five to ten dollars from persons not capable or willing to defend a patent law suit.
Mr. HARRIS: The injury arises where a patent right owner permits some one to manufacture and sell an infringement and then the law allows him to recover damages from the farmer or other persons using such a machine, not knowing it to bean infringement. The law should be that if the patentee allows an infringement to go upon the market innocent purchasers should not suffer.
The joint resolution, together with a substitute offered by Mr. REEVE, was referred to a select committee of three, which the LIEUTENANT GOVERNOR made to consist of Messrs, Winterbotham, Smith and Grubbs.
Bills for acts were introduced, read the first time, and referred to appropriate committees, viz;
By Mr. DICE, by request, [S. 108] to secure to inmates of insane hospitals the right to communicate with persons outside by letter or otherwise. Also [S. 109] to authorize inquisitions of insanity.
By Mr. CADWALLADER, [S.110] to amend section 1 of an act of March 10, 1875, declaring agreements to pay attorney's fees in any evidences of indebtedness void.
By Mr. VIEHE, [S. 111] to enable certain manufacturing and mining companies of other States to hold and convey real estats in this State.
By Mr SARNINGHAUSEN, by request, [S. 112] authorizing executors and administrators to convey real estate sold by decedent in his lifetime, but nor, conveyed by him.
By Mr. STREIGHT, [S. 113] to prohibit aid to railroads by any city, town, township or county.
By Mr. MAJOR, [S. 114] to allow a reasonable homestead exemption--householders, $1,000; other citizens, male or female, $500.
By Mr. FOWLER, [S. 115] providing for the trial of causes instituted in the State courts against foreign life and fire insurance companies doing business in this State, and to prevent the transfer of such causes to the Federal Courts.
By Mr. TAYLOR, [S. 116] to regulate the sale of spiritous liquors.
Then came the recess till 2 o'clock.
The presiding officer [Mr. FOWLER in the chair laid before the Senate a message from
the governor suggesting the propriety of selling the plat of ground in this city
bounded by Meridian, New York, Pennsylvania and New York streets, known as "University
Square," and devoting the proceeds thereof to the uses of the State University in lieu
of the usual appropriations from the State treasury. [This message was referred to the
The PRESIDING OFFICER announced the special order for this hour being the consideration of Mr. Streight's concurrent resolution for instructing our senators and requesting our representatives in congress to favor the passage of the bill now pending in that body to regulate traffic on railroads.
MR. STREIGHT had no interest in mis matter other than the interest of our common
fellow citizens. When each of the transportation lines stood free and untrammeled,
propared, each and every one, to bid on carrying freight independent of each other,
then there could be little complaint, but, sir, they have thought it wise to pool
their business so as to form one grand combination, and to-day a combination exists so
powerful and overbearing, that if there was but one single transportation line from
here to the sea shore it would be far better for the people. The people have created
and encouraged these lines; some of them have received grants in lands and bonds to
twice the cost of their construction; some of them have received territories of laud
greater in extent than the whole State of Indiana, and now we find these corporations
joining with each other in one grand combination, which will enable them to
arbitrarily fix the price for transportation of every bushel of wheat, every bushel of
corn, and every beef, as well as every article we produce for export, at every
railroad station throughout the length and breadth of the land. Now that this state of
things exists it is time for the people to speak out through their representatives and
say to these railroad monopolists, "Thus far shalt then go, and no farther."
A bill looking to the correction of this evil has passed the lower House of Congress,
and is now before the senate. It may be said that our congressmen understand their
business best, but it must be remembered that the people have no active paid lobby to
work up their interests in Congress, and that can not be said of the railroad
interests. Millions of dollars have been spent every year in the lobbies and about the
halls of Congress, and millions will be spent this year, and for that reason there
should be an expression from the Indiana Legislature on that subject. Hundreds of
millions of dollars are practically managed to-day by a little board of five men who
can get together and make figures that will break the fortunes of men here in the West
It is the duty of the State to protect its citizens from extortion. The National
Government has made it possible for this great combination to be formed, and as this
is a subject which interests deeply every branch of industry throughout the length and
breadth of our land it is a wise thing to stop it, as the bill now pending in Congress
proposes to do, and commence protecting the people who have suffered so largely from
this state of things. It may be said that the best way is to permit competition, but
the very men who control these pools have made
On motion by Mr. REEVE the pending resolution was referred to the
Mr. WINTERBOTHAM, from the
Mr. STREIGHT offered the following amendment:
Provided, that no money be appropriated to pay mileage to members who have received and used railroad passes going to and returning from the capital.
Mr. STREIGHT--If there has been no expense to members in traveling to the State capitol, the State ought not pay them mileage. It is taken for granted that no member is willing to draw more pay for his services here than every other member. This whole principle is wrong. Look back in the history of State Legislation and show where railroads have ever asked for anything they have not obtained; and it is equally true that nearly every measure the people have asked for to protect themselves from oppression by the railroads have been denied.
Mr. REEVE stood with the senator heart and soul, but saw no way to enforce the amendment.
Mr. MENZIES paid his way on the railroads. There had been a pass over the Vincennes Road put on his desk, but inside of sixty minutes thereafter he had mailed it back to the president of that company.
Mr. REEVE demanded the previous question, which was seconded by the Senate, and under its operation the amendment was rejected by--yeas 11, nays 33.
Mr. TREAT explaining: He did not believe any measure we could pass would prevent the payment of mileage to members, according to the statute. He had no passes.
Mr. VIEHE did not believe this amendment ought to pass; it was a kind of insinuation against members, and might bring about a kind of inquisition to find out who had passes. He had paid his way here, and should probably do the same thing when he goes home.
Mr. WOOLLEN, in explanation, had no pass, and should hot have during the session; and was opposed, to members using passes, but, believing this amendment should not be put in a bill coming from the House, would vote "no."
So the amendment was rejected.
The bill was then read the third time and finally passed, by--yeas 45, nays 2.
Bills for acts were introduced, read the first time, and severally referred to appropriate committees, as follows:
By Mr. BRISCOE, by request, [S. 117] to abolish the criminal court of Allen County.
By Mr. LANGDON, [S. 118] amending sections 199,201,202,203 and 205 of the general practice act of June 18,1852.
By Mr. KAHLO, [S. 119] repealing the act establishing a superior court in the county of Cass
By Mr. COFFEE, by request, [S. 120] providing for uniformity in the beginning and ending of the term of office of circuit judges, prosecuting attorneys and county officers and their successors.
By Mr. TRUSLER, by request, [S. 121] to repeal section 2 of the misdemeanor act of December 2,1865.
By Mr. SHAFFER, [S. 122] to provide for repairs on free turnpike roads in the various counties of Indiana.
By Mr. GRUBBS, [S. 123] defining the meaning of the first proviso of the second section of the act providing for the relocation of county seats, approved March 22,1855.
By Mr. SMITH, [S. 124] defining jurisdiction of justices of the peace and mayors of cities in certain cases.
By Mr FOSTER, by request, [S. 125] providing for the conviction or persons in possession of stolen property feloniously brought from other states o territory or any foreign country.
By Mr. BURRELL, [S. 126] for a general insurance act making general provisions for the organization, government and taxation and regulation of various classes of insurance companies.
By Mr COMSTOCK, [S. 127] to amend section 334 of the general practice act of June 18,1852.
By Mr. CADWALLADER, by request, [S. 128] for a homestead exemption--not to exceed 40 acres of land and dwelling thereon.
By Mr. MENZIES, [S. 129] providing for change of venue from mayors of cities and justices of the peace.
By Mr. VIEHE, [S. 130] to regulate the number of petit jurors in the several courts--six.
By Mr. HARRIS, [S. 131] to provide for the election of a police judge in cities having a voting population of 16,000, as shown by the votes cast for governor at the last election.
By Mr. REEVE, [S. 132] relating to the collection of debts.
By Mr. MOORE, [S. 133] in relation to plank, gravel or turnpike road companies, to prevent the opening of ways around toll gates, providing for the granting of right of way or extension of said roads over public highways or portions thereof.
By Mr.URMSTON, [S. 134] to divide the State into congressional districts.
By Mr.WOOD, [S. 135] to declare Government patents, and certified copies thereof, evidence.
By Mr. DICE, [S. 136] to regulate the use of human bodies for the purpose of dissection.
By Mr. TAYLOR, [S. 137] providing for printing legal notices by the lowest bidder.
Then the Senate adjourned.
The SPEAKER called the House to order the members standing--Rev. Mr. Lynch offered prayer.
The clerk commenced the reading of the journal when--
On the motion of Mr. TULLEY the further reading was dispensed with.
Mr. LEHMAN offered a resolution that the House of Representatives now rescind the agreement to locate committee rooms at the Grand Hotel, and that rooms 149,151,119,124 and 126 in the Occidental Hotel be substituted therefor at a rental of $185.
Upon the motion of Mr. GORDON that part 01 the resolution relating to accepting rooms at the Occidental was stricken out.
On the motion of Mr. HEROD the resolution was referred to a special committee.
Subsequently the SPEAKER made the committee to consist of Messrs. Herod, Briggs and Humphreys.
Mr. DAVIDSON offered a concurrent resolution instructing our senators and requesting our representatives in Congress to use their influence for the repeal of our present national banking law, and substitute an equal amount of greenbacks in lieu of all such national bank notes.
Mr. GORDON made an ineffectual motion to
The resolution was adopted by--yeas 53, nays 36.
Mr. HEROD offered a resolution that on and after Monday next the hour for the morning session shall be 10 o'clock.
The resolution lies over, under the rules, for one day.
The SPEAKER then proceeded with the call by counties for the introduction of bills, resolutions, etc.
The following described bills were introduced, read the first time, and. passed to the second reading:
By Mr. RE1CHELDAFER, [H. R. 194] to prohibit, the sale of intoxicating liquors on Sundays, election, or national holidays.
By Mr. CAMPBELL, [H. R. 195] for the relief of the sureties of R. K. Reed, trustee of Washington Township, Cass County; also a petition on the same subject, which was referred without reading.
By Mr. COMPTON. [H. R. 196] prescribing when guardians and administrators shall make report and when they shall file new bonds.
By Mr. CALDWELL, [H. R. 197] to amend section two of an act providing for the election and appointment of supervisor. Also a resolution, which was adopted, that it is the judgment of this House that there is no necessity for an increase of the State debt or for an increase of taxation.
By Mr. STUCKER, [H. R. 198] providing for reducing the jurisdiction of the circuit court, and increasing that of justice of the peace.
By Mr. MARCH, [H. R. 199] to amend section two of an act providing for the election and appointment of supervisors.
By Mr. SHUTT, [H. R. 200] to amend sections one and five of an act to provide for the more speedy trial of cases; also H.R. 201 prohibiting minors from attending saloons.
By Mr. CONNOWAY, [H. R. 202] authorizing towns and cities to exact license for the sale of intoxicating liquors.
By Mr DAVIDSON, [H. R. 203] to enable cities and towns to aid in the construction of railroads, gravel roads, hydraulics, manufactories, etc.
By Mr. CAREY, [H. R. 204] to punish executors, administrators, etc., for breach of trust.
By Mr. ARNOLD of Grant, [H. R. 205] to amend sec, 27 of an act providing for the election and qualification of justice of the peace. Also [H. R. 206] authorizing County Commissioners to pay certain expenses of constables and marshals.
By Mr. LINDLEY, [H. R. 207] prescribing the manner and time for the election of supervisors.
By Mr. HANDY, [H. R. 208] to exempt $1,000 in real or personal property, or both from
sale on execution. Also a joint resolution on the subject of Mormonism, which was
referred to the
Mr. Johnson offered a joint resolution, [H. R. 15]as follows:
Resolved by the General Assembly of the State of Indiana, That our senators be instructed and our representatives requested to use their influence and votes to procure the passage of the necessary laws to carry into effect the following principles herein set forth, to-wit:
Be it further resolved, That the governor is hereby requested to forward a copy of these resolutions to each of our senators and representatives in Congress.
A division of the quest ion being demanded, the first proposition of the first division of the resolution was being considered when--
Mr. OSBORN of Elkhart made an ineffectual motion for indefinite postponement.
Then came the recess for dinner.
The question recurring upon the first division as follows: "1. The unconditional repeal of the specie resumption act"
The yeas and nays being demanded and taken, under file operation of the previous question, resulted--yeas 50, nays 40--as follows:
Those voting in the affirmative were Messrs, Alden, Allen, Baker of Pike, Baker of Tippecanoe, Blockley, Briggs, Brown of Jasper, Caldwell, Carter, Compton, Confer, Cunningham, Dailey, Dalton,Davidson, Davis, Drake, Drover, Edwins, Faulkner; Flodder, Galbraith, Garroutte, Ginz, Handy, Hart, Hosmer, Humphreys, Johnson, Kester, Major, Miers, Mitchell, Perry, Reicheldafer, Saint, Schwiter, Shauck, Shields, Shutt, Stucker, Taylor of Daviess, Taylor of Warrick, Thompson, Tulley, Vanpelt, Van Valzah, Willard, Wimmer, Works.
Those voting in the negative were Messrs. Arnold of Grant, Arnold of Wabash, Bearss, Brown, of Steuben, Carey, Connoway, Conner, Copeland, Donnell, English, Fancher, Golden, Gordon, Herod, Hopklns, Hubbard, Kelly, Kirkpatrick, Lehman, Lindley, March, Nave, Osborn of Elkhart, Owen, Reed, Robeson, Rodman, Robinson, Scholl, Shanks, Skinner, Sleeth, Snoddy, Stevens, Taylor of Lagrange, Thayer, Thornburg, Vawter, Watson, Mr. Speaker.
So the first division was agreed to.
The second division,being "exempting bonds from taxation," was agreed to, by--yeas 57, nays 34.
The third division, to "repeal the law exempting greenbacks from taxation," was also agreed to--yeas 76, nays 12,
The SPEAKER announced the next division "the abolition of all bank issues and the free and unlimited coinage of gold and silver,"
A division of this part of the resolution was demanded, and the first proposition, "the abolition of all bank issues," was agreed to--yeas 59, nays 32,
The second division--"the free and unlimited coinage of gold and silver"--was also agreed to--yeas 85, nays 5.
The third--"the issuing by the General Government of full legal tender paper money, receivable for all dues, public and private, in amounts sufficient to meet the wants of trade, or at least $30 per capita"--was also agreed to--yeas 50, nays 40.
Fourth--"to prohibit the furthering issuing of interest bearing Government Bonds"--was rejected by--yeas 43, nays 45.
The fifth clause--"That Congress take immediate steps whereby the bonded
indebtedness of the Government shall be paid off as fast as the
Mr. GORDON, when his name was called, said: on the proposition, "aye," against instruction, "no,"
The sixth clause--"That Congress pass a law limiting the rate of interest to not over 6 per cent., and fixing a penalty for violating the same" was rejected by--yeas 27, nays 63.
The SPEAKER resumed the call by counties for resolutions, bills, etc.
The following described were introduced, read the first time, and passed to the second reading.
By Mr. JOHNSON, [H. R. 209] to amend section 4 of an act to incourage horse thief detective associations. Also a joint resolution [H. R. 16] declaring against resumption, and for a reduction of one half of all the salaries of the Federal officers and Members of Congress.
On the motion of Mr. OSBORN of Elkhart the resolution was adopted.
Mr. CUNNINGHAM offered a resolution, which was adopted, to the effect that all
resolutions relating to national affairs hereafter introduced shall go to the
By Mr. KIRKPATRICK, [H. R. 210] to amend section 3 of an act for the regulation of weights and measures.
By Mr. THAYER, [H. R. 211] providing for the canceling of judgments.
By Mr. TAYLOR of Legrange, [H. R. 212] defining certain misdemeanors.
By Mr. EDWINS, [H. R. 213] to authorize sheriff's to administer oaths. Also [H. R. 214] to regulate passenger fare on railroads. Also [H. R.215] to prevent the carrying of dead hogs on thoroughfares [when dead with disease].
Mr. ROBINSON presented the claim of Fletcher Rubush for $193.00, which was referred
to the
He also introduced a bill [H. R. 216] for a homestead.
By Mr. OSBORN of Elkhart, [H. R. 217] allowing deeds, mortgages, etc., when duly recorded, to be admitted as evidence in the courts.
Mr. WORKS offered a resolution which was adopted, that the
By Mr. SCHWITZER. [H. R. 218] to amend section 10 of an act providing for the election of justices of the peace. Also, [H. R. 219] to repeal an act for the protection of fish.
By Mr.ALLEN, [H. R. 220] to exempt the property of married men, in certain cases, from sale on execution.
By Mr. HUTHSTEINER, [H. R. 221] to regulate the rate of interest on the school fund loans [6 per cent.]
On the motion of Mr. SHANKS the business now on the speaker's desk was taken up.
A long communication was read from the governor recommending indemnification of the
sheriffs and others participating in the conviction of criminals, which was referred
to the
Th nine proposed amendments to the State constitution, as adopted by the last General Assembly, and printed on pages 156, ]60, 161,162, 163 and 164 of the acts of the regular session of 1877, and page 85 of the acts of the special session of 1877, were severally read the first time, and made the special order for next Monday at 2 o'clock p. m.
Mr. BRIGGS, from the committee appointed to procure rooms for the use of committees, reported that they had secured rooms 124, 119, 149,151 and "G" at the Occidental Hotel, for the session, at $185.
The report was adopted,
And then the House adjourned.
Rev. Dr. Wm. A. Bartlett, of this city, offered prayer.
The secretary's minutes of yesterday's proceedings were being read when--
Mr. HARRIS, intimating that the lieutenant governor desired to examine the protest presented yesterday, and ordered spread upon the journal of the Senate without reading, expressed a willingness to allow time till Monday morning for the examination, when the protest shall be embraced in the journal of that day. He desired the protest shall set forth the truth, and that the chair shall be satisfied it does speak the truth.
The LIEUTENANT GOVERNOR: Perhaps we had better leave all notice of It out of this journal, and have it appear on the journal of the day on which it is offered.
Mr. HARRIS: I am satisfied.
The LIEUTENANT GOVERNOR: If there is no objection all notice of the protest will be left out of the journal of yesterday.
Mr. HARRIS: It the chair will say he will examine it by Monday morning.
The LIEUTENANT GOVERNOR: Yes, sir,
Mr. FOWLER moved that the further reading of the journal be dispensed with, but withdrew this motion to avoid a roll call.
The reading of the minutes were completed, and they were approved by the Senate.
Mr. SARNUGHAUSEN called up his motion submitted yesterday, for the appointment of an additional standing committee on sanitary purposes, to be named standing committee No. 28. It was agreed to.
Mr. FOWLER offered a resolution,which was adopted, calling on the president of the board of commissioners of the Insane Asylum for an itemized statement of the entire receipts of the incidental fund derived from the sales of hides and tallow, from beeves slaughtered, etc.
On motion of Mr. HARRIS, the regular order of business was suspended, the remainder of the session to be occupied in the introduction of bills.
Leave of absence was asked and obtained for Messrs, Shaffer, Traylor, Shirk and Trusler till Monday at 2 p.m. Messrs. Heilman, Davenport, Kahlo, Viehe, Urmston, Kent, Dice and Poindexter have leave of absence till Monday.
Bills for acts were introduced, read the first time and severally referred to appropriate committees, as follows:
By Mr. REEVE, [S. 138] relating to congressional and township school funds; the loan of fractional sums thereof by combining into a "miscellaneous fund" and requiring full distribution of all funds required to be on hand by law.
By Mr. GARRIGUS, [S. 139] to prevent waste and injury to real estate, or any injury thereto, that has been or may hereafter be sold upon execution or other process from a court of record.
By Mr. MENZIES, [S. 140] authorizing the surrender of city charters or municipal organization of any city whose population shall be less than 7,000 inhabitants,
By Mr. LEEPER, [S. 141] for the protection of wild game, and defining the time when the same may be taken or killed; and also providing for the protection of certain birds therein named, and their eggs, viz: Turtle dove meadow lark, robin, mocking bird, bluebird, wren, sparrow, red bird, pewee, martin, thrush, swallow, oriole, yellow hammer, or cat bird.
By Mr. FOSTER, [S. 142] to confirm and make valid sales of real estate made by commissioners appointed to carry out the provisions of any will.
By Mr. TAYLOR, [S. 143] to prevent the dismissal of causes before Justices of the Peace--suits on account of indebtedness on motion of defendant, on account of non-appearance of plaintiff, unless defendant maks affidavit that such claim is not just.
By Mr. WIER, [S. 144] to repeal all laws in force providing for a levy of a cash or money poll-tax.
By Mr. COMSTOCK, [S. 145] to amend section 115 of the general practice act of June 17, 1852--verdicts in felony cases will be decided by nine jurors.
By Mr. FOSTER, [S. 146] to amend sections 119 and 155 of the general practice act of June 17, 1852, allowing appeal in cases of "conviction" as well as acquittal.
By Mr. GRUBBS, [S. 147] to amend sections 3 and 8 of an act to provide for the inspection of petroleum oil for illuminating purposes.
By Mr. WOOD, [S. 148] to repeal section 247 of an act to provide for the uniform assessment of property and for the collection and return of taxes thereon approved December 21,1872.
By Mr. STREIGHT, by request, [S. 149] to protect the citizens of this State from empiricism, and to elevate the standard of the medical profession.
By Mr. DAVIS, [S. 150] declaring when the judges of this State shall be paid their salaries out of the State treasury--monthly instead of quarterly.
By Mr. TRUSLER, [S. 151] to amend sections one and two of the act providing for the election and appointment of supervisors of highway, etc., approved March 5, 1877--increasing his pay to $1.25 a day, and striking out the freehold qualification.
By Mr. WILSON, [S. 152] to regulate the testimony of experts in courts of justice--shall give the the expert a reasonable length of time to consider a clear statement in writing upon the points required in his testimony.
By Mr GARRIGUS, [S. 153] to amend section 87 of the general practice act of June 17, 1852. If criminal defendant be found guilty witnesses shall be allowed fees.
By Mr. HARRIS, [S. 154] supplemental to the voluntary association statutes--unmarried women may own and control stock; also married women may own and control stock without the consent or control or their husbands.
By Mr. GRUBBS, [S. 155] to prevent the carrying of concealed or dangerous weapons.
By Mr. BAGAN, [S. 156] touching the duties of township trustees---with consent of county commissioners, may levy a tax to pay his fees and office expenses.
By Mr. FOSTER [S. 157] to preserve evidence taken before grand juries in certain cases--when so desired by the grand jury.
By Mr. HARRIS [S. 158] concerning married women, removing all disabilities, the same as if she were sole.
By Mr. GRUBBS [S. 157] to amend sections 308 and 313 of the general practice of June 18, 1852, jurors in civil action 3 or 0 with two peremptory challenges
By Mr. COMSTOCK, [S. 160] to amend the act in relation to weights and measures. Avoirdupois weight: changing shelled corn to 58 lbs.; corn on cob. 70; oats, 33 lbs.
By Mr. HARRIS, [S. 101] concerning bills of exceptions.
By Mr. GRUBBS, [S. 162] to amend sections 51 and 52 of the justices' qualification act of June 9,1852--jury may be less than six by consent, with two peremptory challenges.
By Mr. RAGAN, [S. 163] further defining duties of boards of commissioners in reference to the appointment of inspector of election-- shall be made from the party in the majority at the last previous election for Secretary of State.
By Mr. LANGDON, [S. 164] supplemental to the general city Incorporation law of March 14, 1867--where there is a chief of police he shall discharge the duties of marshal.
By Mr GRUBBS, [S. 165] defining the crime of abortion, or attempted abortion, and prescribing punishment therefor.
The Senate then adjourned until Monday at 10 a, m., under the order adopted this morning.
The House met at 9 o'clock a. m., the speaker in the chair.
The order of prayer was conducted by Rev. Mr. LYNCH, presiding elder of the Methodist Episcopal Church for this district.
The SPEAKER announced the first thing in the order of business to be the call for reports from committees. He commenced calling the list of committees, but no reports being submitted, he called for reports from select committees, whereupon--
Mr. OSBORN of Elkhart, from the select committee appointed yesterday to secure better ventilation in the hall, reported an interview with the superintendent of the building and the obtaining from that officer a promise that a man experienced with the workings of the heating apparatus would hereafter give special attention to it without extra charge to the State.
The report of the committee was concurred in.
Mr. HEROD, in pursuance of notice heretofore given, called up his resolution for a change of the morning hour for the daily sessions of the House of Representatives. The question being on the amendment [Mr. Shank's] to make the hour twelve o'clock, noon--
The amendment was rejected.
The question then recurring on the original resolution, the yeas and nays were demanded by two members, and being ordered and taken, resulted--yeas 55, nays 27.
So the resolution was adopted, and hereafter the House of Representatives will meet for daily morning sessions at 10 o'clock a. m.
The SPEAKER then proceeded to call by counties for the presentation of bills and resolutions:
The following described bills for acts were introduced, read the first time and passed to the second reading:
By Mr. SLEETH [H. R. 222] authorizing incorporated towns to assess and receive license from vendors of Intoxicating liquors.
By Mr. SLEETH, [H. R. 223] to amend section 2 of an act providing for the election and appointment of supervisors of highways.
Mr. BRIGGS presented a petition from citizens of Sullivan County, which was referred to an appropriate committee without reading.
By Mr. ARNOLD of Wabash, [H. R. 224] for an act authorizing an official seal for the use of justices of the peace in the attestation of official papers.
Mr. TAYLOR of Warrick offered a resolution that the doorkeeper procure a sufficient number of copies of the Revised Statutes at wholesale prices, to furnish a set for the use of each member during the session.
The SPEAKER ruled the resolution out of order because the House of Representatives heretofore refused to adopt a similar resolution.
By Mr. OWEN, [H. R. 225] to amend section lot the act to prevent the spread of Canada thistles. Railroad authorities shall cause their section hands to destroy and prevent the spread of Canada thistles along the track and on all railroad lands.
By Mr. TULLEY, [H. R. 226] to repeal the act authorizing the incorporation of Building and Loan Associations.
By Mr. TULLEY, [H. R. 227] to repeal the act for the protection of fish,
By Mr. TULLEY, a resolution, which was adopted, directing the chairman of the several
house committees, whenever they shall consider bills originating in the House of
Representatives, to notify the authors thereof,
By Mr. DAILEY, a resolution, which was adopted, tendering the thanks of the House of Representatives to Dr. T. H. Lynch, presiding elder of the Methodist Episcopal Church in this district, for chaplain service during the present week.
By Mr. DAILEY, [H. R. 228] authorizing the correction of the school account of Adams County.
The bill [S. 32] to authorize the appointment
of a clerk to the
Mr. WILLARD: An amendment to section 1 providing that there be allowed a clerk to the
Mr. OSBORNE of Elkhart insisted if the
Mr. GORDON favored the passage of the bill. He thought the
Mr. WILLARD was willing the two committees should each have a clerk if they could
keep him busy. His amendment was intended to so operate that when the
On motion by MR. LEHMAN the bill and pending amendment were referred to the
The SPEAKER then announced the order for the consideration of House bills on the second reading:
The following described bills were read the second time, and referred to Appropriate Committees:
Mr. Baker's bill, [H. R. 421 to repeal section 14 of the common school law; also, his bill, [H. R. 43] to make interest on the loan or forbearance of moneys six per cent.
Mr. Taylor of Warrick's bill, [H. R. 44] to amend section two of the common school law; also, his bill, [H. R. 45] to legalize taxes levied by incorporated towns.
Mr. Mitchell's bill, [H. R. 46] to amend section one of an act to provide for township elections approved March 3,1877.
Mr. Dailey's bill, [H. R. 47] for an act to enable the owners of wetlands to drain and reclaim the same--through the action of county commissioners; also, his bill, [H. R. 48] fixing the time when actions shall stand for trial in the Circuit Court; also, his bill, [H. R. 49] to provide for township elections.
Mr. Compton's bill [H. R. 50] declaring void agreements to pay attorney's fees in any bill of exchange, acceptance, draft, or other evidence of indebtedness.
Mr. Stucker's bill [H. R. 51] to abolish the office of county school superintendent and to appoint a county school examiner instead. Also his bill [H. R. 52] to amend an act in elation to highways. Also his bill [H. R. 53] to amend an act defining who shall be competent witnesses.
Mr. Caldwell's bill [H. R. 54] for redistricting the State for legislative purposes. Also his bill [H. R. 55] to legalize the board of county commissioners of Clinton County.
Mr. Taylor of Daviess' bill [H. R. 56] defining the Tenth, Twelfth, and Third Judicial Circuit.
Mr. Donnell's bill [H. R. 57] to legalize sheriffs sales.
Mr. March's bill [H. R. 58] to amend an act declaring agreements to pay attorney's fees in bills of exchange, acceptances, drafts, notes, or other evidences of indebtedness; also, his bill [H. R. 59] providing for appeals from boards of county commissioners.
Mr. Willard's bill [H. R. 60] to incorporate the orphan's home of New Albany.
Mr. Connoway's bill [H. R. 61] concerning interest on money--to make the legal rate 6 per cent.
Mr. Davidson's bill [H. R. 62] to amend the act for the organization of county boards, prescribing their powers and duties, etc.; also, his bill [H. R. 63] to amend an act in relation to county treasurers; also, his bill [H. R. 64] to provide for the working and repairing of public highways, abolishing the office of road supervisor, etc.
Pending the consideration of the above order--
Mr. HEROD, in order to accommodate a number of members who desired to go to their homes to-day, moved that when the House adjourns it be till 2 o'clock p. m. Monday.
The motion was agreed to.
Mr. HANDY, from the
Mr. GAROUTTE moved that the House adjourn.
The SPEAKER begged the indulgence of the House to state that inasmuch as the proposed amendments to the constitution of this State referred to this by the last General Assembly, have been transmitted from the Senate to this House without any accompanying resolution, he would suggest the following form as a proper manner in which to get the question before the House--
Senate joint resolution No. 1, to amend section 11 of article 2 of the constitution and prescribing the qualifications of voters proposed and agreed to by a majority of the members elected to the Senate and House of Representatives of the Fiftieth General Assembly of Indiana, and by said General Assembly referred to the present Assembly being the General Assembly chosen at the next General Assembly after the same was so proposed and agreed to by the Fiftieth General Assembly, in the following words, to-wit: * * * Having been read the third time, the question is, will the House of Representatives agree to and ratify and adopt the said joint resolution as adopted by the Fiftieth General Assembly of the State of Indiana, proposing an amendment to the constitution, and by said General Assembly referred to the present General Assembly, as set forth in the joint resolution as aforesaid. Those of you in favor thereof, will, as your names are called, say "aye," and those of a contrary opinion will, as your names are called, say "no,"
Mr. Garoutte's motion was then agreed to,
And so the House stands adjourned till Monday at 2 o'clock p. m.
The LIEUTENANT GOVERNOR took the chair at the appointed hour, and the secretary's minutes of Saturday's proceedings were read and approved.
Mr. COMSTOCK presented a number of petitions, numerously signed by citizens and taxpayers of Wayne County, praying for the abolishment of the Wayne County Superior Court. Also, a petition from the same source praying for a reduction in fees and salaries of State and county officers, and to otherwise reduce the burdens of taxation.
Mr. RAGAN presented a petition similar to the last one described, from citizens of Hendricks County.
They were severally referred to appropriate committees.
Mr. WOOD offered a concurrent resolution, which was adopted, providing for the appointment of a joint committee to prepare a railroad tariff and freight bill, establishing a uniform system of rates throughout the State.
Mr. FOWLER offered a resolution that at the hour of 12 m. to-morrow this body will, in pursuance of an act of Congress approved July 25, 1866, proceed to vote for a Senator in Congress for the term of six years from March 4, 1879, in the place of Hon. D. W. Voorhees, the present incumbent.
Mr. HARRIS thought the resolution unnecessary, as the federal statute requires the action contemplated in the resolution.
The LIEUTENANT GOVERNOR did not suppose there was anything improper in the resolution, and would hold it to be in order, as advisory merely.
Mr. REEVE: The resolution proposes to elect a man in the place of Mr. Voorhees, and I don't know that I will agree to that yet. [Laughter.] I move to lay the resolution on the table.
The motion was agreed to.
Mr. FOWLER offered a resolution similar to the one above, for an election to fill out the unexpired term of the late Senator O. P. Morton.
It was rejected.
Bills for acts were introduced, read the first time and severally referred to appropriate committees, as follows:
By Mr. WIER, [S. 166] to amend the assessment laws so as to authorize a penalty where the second installment of taxes become delinquent, and to regulate some other duties of county treasurers.
By Mr. FOWLER, [S. 167] defining the rights and liabilities of married women, removing legal disabilities.
By Mr. Sarnighausen, [S. 168] to establish a bureau of statistics in the Secretary of State's office, concerning agriculture, mining, manufactures, education, crime, public taxes and expenditures, corporations, immigration, and vital and social statistics.
By Mr. HART, [S. 169] to prevent persons, who are the mortgagors of goods and chattels, and who retain possession of the same, from running off, hiding, secreting, selling, exchanging, or otherwise disposing of the same in violation of the terms of the mortgage.
By Mr. LANGDON, [S. 170] amending secs. 19 and 20 of the decedents estates, act of May 14, 1852. When the estate of a decedent does not exceed $1,000, it rests, without administration and free from demands of creditors, first, in surviving wife or husband if no children; second, to surviving parent in trust for self and children, if any, during infancy and unmarried: third, to children, if no surviving parent. The provisions in case of insolvency, or estate is less the 81,000 after paying debts.
By Mr. FOSTER, [S. 171] to amend see. 17 of the felony act of June 10, 1852, making a housebreaker guilty of burglary. Penalty, imprisonment from 2 to 14 years.
By Mr. MOORE, [S. 172] to legalize certain sales made under voluntary assignments of real and personal property in trust for the benefit of creditors.
By Mr. FOWLER, [S. 173] providing for notice by publication to be given to defendants in a weekly newspaper in certain cases to defendants of bastardy suits in cases where they are concealed or have left the State.
By Mr. VIEHE,[S. 174] to provide for the mode
By Mr. SARNIGHAUSEN, [S. 175] for the appointment of county superintendents--by township trustees.
By Mr. TRAYLOR, [S. 176] to legalize the official acts of the board of trustees of the town of Jasper.
By Mr. COFFEY, [S. 177] to repeal sec. six of an act concerning promissory notes, bills of exchange, etc., approved March 11,1861.
By Mr. SARNIGHAUSEN, [S.178] amending sections 16 and 34 of the common school law--transfer for school purposes at request at the time of the school enumeration, and in relation to teachers' license.
By Mr. HARRIS, [S. 179] by request,a bill for an act to establish a State Board of Health, to provide for a system of registration and report of vital statistics, to define the duties of certain State and county officers, and to punish neglect, that the Indiana Health Commission as authorized by the State Medical Society, is hereby constituted a State Board of Health, the governor to add two physicians thereto, with the advice and consent of the Senate.
By Mr. BURRELL, [S. 180] for amendment of section 12 of the divorce law of March 10, 1873, by striking out the proviso authorizing publication in daily papers, of notice to non-resident defendant.
By Mr. GRUBBS, [S. 181] to amend section 18 of an act regulating descents and the apportionment of estates, approved May 14, 1852.
By Mr. COMSTOCK, [S. 182] concerning real estate devised and apportionment of guardian in estate cases.
By Mr. WOOLLEN, [S. 183] amending sec. 9 of the act of June 9,1852, touching the relation of guardian and ward, so guardian shall file inventory within one month after appointment, render an account to court every year, with statement as to moneys, securities, etc.
By Mr. FOSTER, [S. 184] to prevent the practice of resorting to distant courts to oppress the citizens of Indiana--by sending out of the State claims for debt to be collected by proceedings in attachment.
By Mr. RAGAN, [S. 185] to provide for the purchase by the State librarian of 150 sets of the Be vised Statutes for the use of members of the General Assembly, and providing how the same shall be preserved for the use of succeeding members of the General Assembly.
On motion by Mr. REEVE, it was ordered that in all cases where a bill shall be reported from. a committee with a recommendation that it so pass, that as a matter of course 100 copies of such bill shall be printed for the use of the Senate and be laid on the desks of members.
Then came the recess till 2 o'clock, p. m.
The LIEUTENANT GOVERNOR makes the
By Mr. OLDS, [S. 186] to amend section 3 of the act to provide for the election and certain of the duties of prosecuting and district attorneys, approved June 11, 1852, and to provide certain duties of justices of the peace and other courts having jurisdiction, for issuing of process for the apprehension of persons charged with felonies or misdemeanors, and providing for the attendance of witnesses to testify in relation to the commission of felonies and misdemeanors.
By Mr. FOWLER, [S.187] amending sections 1,2 and 20 of the supervisor at highways act of March 5, 1877, so as to strike out the freehold qualification, and also all that relates to taxing acres of land.
By Mr. TRAYLOR, [S. 188] to amend section 1 of an act providing for township elections, approved March 3, 1877--all township officers shall be elected at the biennial election in October, 1880, and every second year there-after.
By Mr. HARRIS, [S. 189] to amend section 6 of an act to provide for the sale of property held in trust in certain cases, approved February 4, 1875.
By Mr. GRUBBS, [S. 190] to amend the exemption law of February 17, 1852, so as to exempt $600 from sale or any process of any court.
By Mr. GRUBBS, [S. 191] to amend the interest law so it shall be six per cent--in writing eight per cent--nothing in this act to prevent renewals of loans made previously, at original rate of interest.
By Mr. GRUBBS, [S. 192 ] to amend section 468 of the general practice act of June 18, 1852, by adding that the plaintiff shall be notified by mail or otherwise of the time and place of sale of such personal property on execution.
By Mr. KAGAN, [S. 193] relating to the penal ordinances of incorporated towns and cities. It shall be a sufficient defense it shown that for the same act defendant has been tried before by the State.
By Mr. COMSTOCK, [S. 194] to amend section 20 of the competent witness act, approved March 11, 1867--striking out all in relation to husband and wife but these words, "and except also that in suits by the husband for the seduction of the wife."
Mr. REEVE offered a concurrent resolution that inasmuch as important public works have been commenced by towns and cities for the supplying of public necessities, the suspension of which for want of funds or of ability to issue bonds would result in loss and injury, and the Immediate approval of the proposed constitutional amendment No. 9, limiting taxation to 2 per cent., may work such injury, therefore, if said amendment shall be submitted to a vote of the people it shall not be till the general election in 1880, without regard to the time when any other proposed amendments shall be submitted.
Mr. VIEHE thought the resolution ought not to be adopted.
Mr. REEVE: The improvements referred to are going on now, and the only object of the resolution is to get some kind of intimation of what the sense of the Legislature is upon the subject. If any of these works have to be suspended they had better be suspended at once. The House of Representatives may be dilatory in the passage of the amendments, and a large sum of money may be expended on these works in the meantime, which would be unfortunate if the adoption of the constitutional amendments should force suspension.
Mr. LANGDON, thinking this matter ought to receive considerable consideration, and that this resolution ought not to be voted on now, as the judgment of the Senate might be forestalled, moved to lay the resolution on the table.
The motion was agreed to.
The bill [S. 4--Mr. Comstock's] to abolish the superior court of Wayne county coming up, with a favorable committee report thereon, the report was concurred in, the bill read the second time and ordered engrossed for the third reading.
The bill [S. 29--Mr. Shirk's] to loan school funds at six per cent. coming up, with a committee report recommending indefinite postponement, the report was concurred in, and so the bill was indefinitely postponed.
The bill [S. 50--Mr. Viehe's] to amend section 30 of the justices' act
coming up, with a com-[mittee]
The bill [S. 52--Mr. Coffey's] for abolishing struck juries, coming up on the second reading with a committee report recommending indefinite posponement, the report was concurred in.
The bill [S. 73--Mr. Moore's] that aliens may take property by device or descent, the same as natives, coming up with a committee report recommending indefinite postponement, the report was concurred in.
The bill [S. 76--Mr. Foster's] increasing the number of peremptory challenge of jurors coming up with a committee report recommending indefinite postponement, it was concurred in.
The protest presented by Mr. Harris on Friday last and ordered spread upon the Senate journal of that day without reading at his instance, but which was expunged therefrom on Saturday morning in order that the lieutenant governor might have an opportunity to examine It and be satisfied that it states the truth, was submitted for record on the Senate Journal of to day. Mr. Harris' protest sets out the proceedings in the organization of the Senate to which he objects, and closes in the following words:
Believing "It is the duty of every person clothed with the power of office to observe the law as heretofore interpreted and understood" (S. J. 1877, p. 54), and believing said rulings were contrary to the constitution and parliamentary law. I hereby protest against the same.
We, the undersigned senators, hereby join the above protest for the reasons herein stated: Wm. Heilman, B. Shirk, Milton Trusler, Francis M. Dice, D. W. Comstock, M. Garrigus, A. D. Streight, W. H. Ragan, S. M. Taylor, W. M. Mercer, E. W. Weir, N. Cadwallader, B. L. Davenport, Walter Olds, M. C. Smith, W. B. F. Treat, A. H. Shaffer, E. R. Wilson, W. A. Moore, B. H, Langdon, Chas. Kahlo, Moses Poindexter.
The calendar of business having been exhausted--
The Senate adjourned.
The SPEAKER called the House to order and said that the order of prayer would be conducted by the representative from Wayne--Mr. Thornburg.
The reading of the journal of Saturday was proceed with until--
On the motion of Mr. GORDON, the further reading was suspended.
Mr. TULLEY demanded a call of the House--which was taken, showing 85 members in their places.
On the motion of Mr. LEHMAN, further proceedings under the call were dispensed with.
Mr. BRIGGS asked and obtained consent of the House to offer a concurrent resolution, which was adopted, providing for the meeting in Joint convention, to compare the vote for United States Senator, on next Wednesday at 12 o'clock, noon.
Mr. SLEETH called up the special order for this hour, being the consideration of the joint resolutions for amending the constitution of the State of Indiana, which passed the last General Assembly, and have also passed the Senate of the present General Assembly, and read the first time in the House of Representatives January 14, 1879; and printed on pages 159, 60,161,163, 163 and 164 of the acts passed at the regular session of the last General Assembly, and on page 85 of the acts passed at the special session of 1877.
The yeas and nays being demanded--upon the motion to take up the special order-- by two members, and being ordered and taken, resulted--yeas 35, nays 54.
Pending the roll call--
Mr. OSBORNE of Elkhart, said: that inasmuch as we have now but two hours and a half for the disposition of these constitutional amendments, and that the proceedings would be interrupted to-morrow, and perhaps the next day, with the election of United States Senator, and many members being desirous that the debate shall continue uninterrupted, he hoped the question would not be pressed this afternoon.
The vote was announced as above set forth, and so the House of Representatives refused to take up the special order.
Mr. OVERMEYER then moved that the proposed amendments to the constitution be considered at 3 o'clock this afternoon. He said the amendments having heretofore been made the special order for 2 o'clock this afternoon, the House should proceed to their consideration, or take up some more important business and postpone the special order to some other time. He made the motion for 3 o'clock this afternoon to see whether these amendments could not be taken up and disposed of. The interruption spoken of by the gentleman from Elkhart, [Mr. Osborne], he did not think would be an interruption worth mentioning. There was but one vote to be taken for United States Senator to-morrow, and he did not think that would occupy more than 15 minutes, and then the House had until noon of the next day, before another vote. He was of opinion the subject should be determined to-day, if we believed it just and right to pass them and send them to the people. He was decidedly in favor of taking them up this afternoon.
Mr. MIERS said he was not afraid to meet the issue, but when we come to amend the constitution of the State it should be approached with great care and not put through in a hurry. He did not think members were prepared now to vote upon so important a question. We ought to consider well our votes upon such vital questions. He therefore moved an amendment, fixing the time for one week from to-day at 2 o'clock in the afternoon.
Mr. OVERMAYER made an ineffectual motion to lay the amendment on the table--yeas 36,; nays,56.
Mr. GORDON moved to amend by making the time Thursday next at 2 o'clock.
Mr. MIERS moved to lay the amendment on the table.
The yeas and nays being demanded, and taken, resulted--yeas, 41; nays, 48.
Mr. MIERS then accepted the amendment of Mr. Gordon. The motion was agreed to, and Thursday next at 2 o'clock p. m fixed for the consideration of the constitutional amendments.
Mr. HANDY presented a report from the
The SPEAKER then proceeded with the call by counties for the introduction of bills, resolutions, etc.
The following described bills for acts were introduced, read the first time and passed to the second reading:
By Mr. STUCKER, [H. R. 229] to amend sec. 3 of an act touching the relation of guardian and ward.
By Mr. STUCKER, [H. R. 230] to authorize administrators or executors to sell real estate.
By Mr SHUTT, [H. R. 231] to legalize the corporate acts of the town of Auburn.
By Mr. SHUTT, [H. R.232] legalizing the issuance of writs of execution of sale and vendue, and sheriff's sales, and declaring judgments of Common Pleas and Circuit Courts to be a lien upon real estate.
Mr. WILLIARD offered the following resolution, which was adopted:
Whereas, There have been grave charges made that the plan of the new State House was decided upon unjustly, and that the contract for the construction of the said building was let against the interests of the State; and,
Whereas, Thousands of people in this State are of the opinion that these charges should be investigated to protect the good name of the State and the character of the State House commissioners, if they have faithfully performed their duty; and,
Whereas, The people of this State of all political parties are interested in ascertaining the real truth in reference to the adoption of the plan and the letting of the contract for said building; and,
WHEREAS, This Legislature will be called upon to make appropriations for continuing the work upon the said building, and should be fully informed in regard to all matters appertaining thereunto; therefore
Resolved, That a select committee of seven, composed of all political parties, be appointed by the Speaker,which shall be charged with the duty of inquiring into the said charges in reference to the adoption of the plans for the new State House, and the letting of the contract for the same, and into the responsibility of the contractors who have undertaken to build said State House, and the sufficiency or their bonds, and to ascertain whether under said contract said new State House can be built within the amount provided by law for the erection of said building; and for these purpose said committee shall have power to send for persons and papers, to examine witnesses under oath, to hear testimony and receive and publish depositions, and shall have leave to report at any time, by bill or otherwise.
Subsequently the SPEAKER made the committee to consist of Messrs. Willard, Lehman, Tulley, Dalton, Herod, Overmeyer and Gordon.
By Mr. FLODDER, [H. R. 233] to amend section 20 of an act providing for the election and appointment of supervisors.
By Mr. FLODDER, [H. R. 234] providing for the protection of fish.
By Mr. CONNOWAY, [H. R. 235] relating to the responsibility of married women.
By Mr. CAREY, [H. R. 236] to prevent domestic animals from running at large.
By Mr. DAVIDSON, [H. R. 237] to protect citizens from incompetent physicians, druggists, and midwives.
By Mr. SNODDY, [H. R. 238] to amend section 647 of the general practice act.
By Mr. ROOKER, [H. R. 239] to legalize mortgages made to the State to secure the school fund loan.
By Mr. WIMMER, [H. R. 240] to prevent the carrying of concealed weapons.
By Mr. WIMMER, [H. R. 241] to fix the salaries of judges of the Circuit, Superior and Criminal Courts.
By Mr. WIMMER, [H. R. 242] to define what shall be the salary of the governor [$4,000]
By Mr. OVERMEYER, [H. R. 243] defining the duties of county commissioners.
By Mr. OVERMEYER, [H. R. 244] relating to penal ordinances of incorporated towns and cities.
By Mr. FANCHER, [H. R. 245] defining the powers and duties of incorporated towns.
By Mr. REED, [H. R. 246] for the appointment of commissioners for the insane
By Mr. REED, [H. R. 247] to legalize acknowledgements of deeds taken by notaries public after expiration of office.
By Mr. SCHWITZER, [H. R. 248] to amend section 172 of an act to provide for a uniform assessment of taxes.
By Mr. SCHWITZER, [H. R. 249] in relation to prosecuting attorneys, and prescribing a mode of bringing witnesses before courts of justice and their examination in reference to felonies and misdemeanors and matters properly connected therewith.
By Mr. SCHWITZER [H. R. 250] requiring parents and guardians to send children between the ages of 8 and 14 years to school [14 weeks in the year.]
By Mr. OSBORNE of Elkhart, [H. R. 251] to provide employment for persons confined in the county jails.
By Mr. OSBORNE, [H. R. 252] defining fornication and adultery
By Mr. OSBORNE,[H. R. 253] providing if or the execution and acknowledgement of official bonds.
By Mr. OSBORNE, [H. R. 254] to protect the purity of the elections and to prohibit illegal voting.
By Mr. GORDON, [H. R. 255] to abolish the fourth judge of the Superior Court of Marion County.
Mr. GORDON offered the following resolution: That the
Mr. OSBORNE of Elkhart moved to strike from the resolution the words "prepare a bill to amend" and insert in lien the words "inquire into the expediency of amending."
Mr. GORDON regarded the law as it now stands as being in violation of the plainest
principles of legislation. The curtailment of the power of the governor to make his
selection from men qualified for the position and force him to make his selection from
two leading parties was, in his opinion, entirely wrong. The governor should be
permitted to make selection from the very best men in the State qualified for the
position without distinction to party. We should do all we can to return to first
principles, and until we can legislate for the people and remain free to selectmen the
best qualified to fill official positions we never shall be safe. He stood for the
elimina-[tion]
The resolution was adopted.
By Mr. HUTHSTEINER, [H. R. 256] to reduce the rates of interest upon county orders or warrants on the treasurer when not paid for want or funds.
Mr. BLOCKLEY offered a resolution, which was adopted, that the
By Mr. BLOCKLY, [H. R. 257] to regulate work on roads,
By Mr. SLEETH, [H. R. 258] to repeal section 16 and amend section 1 of an act concerning voluntary assignments.
By Mr. SAINT, [H. R. 259] to punish elective and other officers for accepting free passes over railroad, steamboat or other lines.
Mr. BRIGGS offered the following resolutions:
Resolved, That the members of this House meet in this hall at 2 1/2 o'clock in the afternoon of Tuesday, the 21st day of January 1879, for the purpose of voting a Senator in the Congress of the United States for the remainder of the term to expire on the 3d of March 1879, and also for the term commencing the 4th day of March 1879, and that the Senate be informed of the passage of this resolution.
The resolution was adopted. The House then adjourned.
Prayer was said by Rev. J. H. RAZOR of the Christian Church of Mooresville, Morgan County.
Petitions were presented: From Jay County praying for the reduction of fees and salaries of county officers one-half; also a temperance petition from Huntington County; also from Marshall county for a constitutional amendment prohibiting the manufacture and sale of intoxicating liquors, to be used as a beverage. They were referred to appropriate committees.
The
Mr. VIEHE offered a resolution, which was adopted, fixing the hour of 2 1/2 o'clock this afternoon for the election of United States senator on the part of the Senate.
On motion by Mr. REEVE, the order of yesterday for the printing of all bills, reported from the committee favorably, was reconsidered, and a proviso added so that when the committee recommend it, 200 copies shall be printed of every bill they deem of sufficient importance.
Mr. STREIGHT offered the following:
WHEREAS, At the last State convention of the Democratic party
of the State of Indiana the party demanded the immediate repeal of the resumption
law, and
Whereas, We believe the repeal of said law would be impolitic, unwise and detrimental to the best interests of the country, and
Whereas, We believe in and fully endorse the doctrines of Andrew Jackson, once president of the United States,that gold and silver, and paper money based thereon and convertible therein at the pleasure of the holder, constitute the only safe currency for the people, and
Whereas, Under the resumption law aforesaid, the dollar now paid to the laborer is equal in value to the dollar paid by the Government to the bondholder, therefore
Be it resolved by the Senate of the State of Indiana, the House of Representatives concurring therein, That our senators in Congress be and they are hereby instructed, and our representatives requested, to oppose, by all honorable means, the repeal of the resumption law of the United States, which went into effect on the first day of January, 1879.
Resolved, That, the secretary of State be requested to forward to each of ous senators and representatives a properly authenticated copy of the foregoing preamble and resolution.
Mr. STREIGHT demanded the previous question. He accepted an amendment, transposing the words "Instructed" and "requested" where they occur n the first resolution.
The Senate seconded the demand upon a division--affirmative 21, negative 16--and the resolution was adopted by--yeas 25, nays 22, as follows:
YEAS--Cadwallader, Comstock, Davenport, Dice, Garrigus, Grubbs, Harris, Heilman, Langdon, Menzies, Mercer,Moore, Olds, Ragan, Reeves, Sarnighausen, Shaffer, Shirk, Smith, Streight, Treat, Trusler, Weir, Wilson and Winterbotham--25.
NAYS--Benz, Briscoe, Burrell, Coffey, Davis, Donham, Foster, Fowler, Hart, Kent, Kramer Leeper, Major, Peterson, Poindexter, Reiley, Tarlton, Traylor, Urmston, Viehe, Wood, Woollen--22.
Pending the roll call--
Mr. REEVES, in explanation of his vote,
Mr. SARNIGHAUSEN, when his name was called, said he had in his hand a copy of the national Democratic platform, adopted in St. Louis in 1876. [He read therefrom.] I can't go back on the national Democratic platform, therefore I vote "aye.". [Tremendous applause from Republican benches.]
Mr. WOODS, in explanation, said: Believing that the Indiana State Senate is not the St. Louis Convention, and that this is a mere electioneering dodge got up by Senator Streight, and believing that no electioneering dodge should be brought into the Senate, and to discourage all such electioneering jobs, I vote "no."
Mr. WINTERBOTHAM, when his name was called, said: Knowing that resumption is an accomplished fact, and believing we are on the high road to prosperity, and wishing that financial differences may be taken out of politics, and believing they ought to be, I vote "aye."
Mr. VIEHE, in explanation of his vote when his name was called, said: Believing it not in order for the Senate to adopt any resolution that shall bind the action of any member in his vote for United States senator, I vote "no."
The roll-call having been completed, a senator moved that Mr. Major's name be called. The lieutenant governor so directed, but the senator not responding, the chair asked if the senator heard the resolution read?
Mr. MAJOR--No, sir.
The LIEUTENANT GOVERNOR then directed the reading of the resolution again.
Mr. MAJOR: "I was called out by a friend before the resolution was offered. I don't know the history of this motion. I know what my sentiments are and what I want to do. I don't want to be involved in any vote I don't understand. I don't know the motive that prompted this motion, nor do I know its effect. Therefore I don't want to vote. I know what I want, and can vote intelligently, if I know the intention and design of this vote, but without some further light I don't want to be picked up.
Mr. BURRELL: I move that he be excused from voting.
The yeas and nays on agreeing to this motion were demanded by Messrs. Harris and Langdon, and being taken resulted yeas 24, nays 22.
So the Senator [Mr. Major] was excused from voting.
Mr. MAJOR--I am now prepared to vote. [Applause.] I vote "no." [Renewed applause.]
The vote was then announced, as above recorded--yeas, 25; nays, 22.
So the resolution was adopted.
Mr. STREIGHT offered the following:
Resolved, That the Senate of the state of Indiana will vote for no man for United States senator who voted for, took and kept the congressional back pay, commonly called the salary grab, as no such man is entitled to the vote of the members of this Senate for the high and honorable position of senator of the United States.
Mr. STREIGHT demanded the previous question but the Senate refused to second the demand--yeas, 21; nays, 26.
Pending the roll call--
Mr. REEVE, when his name was called, said: The Senate of the State of Indiana is no political caucus in which should be discussed the merits claims and rights of candidates for office. I vote "no."
Mr. SARNIGHAUSEN, in explanation of his vote, said: I vote "no" for the same reason as given by the senator from Marshall [Mr. Reeve].
Mr. SMITH, when his name was called, in explanation of his vote, said: Believing the Senate has no right to determine how individual members shall vote on that or any other proposition, I vote "no."
The vote was announced as above, so the Senate refused to second the demand for the previous question.
On motion by Mr. VIEHE the resolution was laid on the table by--yeas 26, nays 21.
Mr. MENZIES offered the following:
Resolved, That no one shall be voted for for United States Senator who has been engaged in Venezuela bond speculations.
Mr. STREIGHT (Mr. Menzies holding the floor), I second the resolution. I hope that the resolution will pass.
Mr. MENZIES demanded the previous question, which being seconded by the Senate, under its operation the resolution was adopted--yeas,36; nays, 10.
Pending the roll call--
Mr. REEVE, when his name was called., said: Inasmuch as the only Venezuela bond speculator I know of is one of the regular candidates of the Republican party, and inasmuch as it is their privilege to vote for an infernal scoundrel if they want to, and inasmuch--
Mr. HARRIS (Interrupting)--I rise to a point of order. The words are unparliamentary. I demand that they be taken down.
Mr. REEVE--Yes sir: take them down.
The LIEUTENANT GOVERNOR--The chair does not remember the words.
Mr. REEVE--I will repeat them. I said that inasmuch as the only Venezuela speculator I remember is one of the regular candidates of the Republican party now, and inasmuch as the Republican party has the right to vote for any Republican scoundrel it wants to--I do not impugn the motives of any man nor refer to any particular member, but to the only speculator in Venezuela bonds I know of and inasmuch as the resolution reflects on the action of the Republican party which made that gentleman its nominee, I believe in their exercising the rights of American citizens and be left free and untrammelled to vote for whom they please. I vote "no."
Mr. STREIGHT: I ask the senator from Marshall [Mr. Reeve] if he knows such to be the case? If so, I would never vote for such a candidate for the United States Senate. I ask the senator to state whether he knows from personal knowledge or evidence that would be sufficient to condemn him, of the fact that any candidate for the United States Senate has been a speculator in Venezuela bond?
Mr. FOWLER rose to a point of order, that we are acting under the previous question, and this debate across the House is unparliamentary.
The LIEUTENANT GOVERNOR so decided.
Mr. SARNIGHAUSEN, when his name was called, in explanation of his vote said: For the same reason I voted "no" on the other resolution, I vote "no" on this.
Mr. SMITH, in explanation of his vote, said: For the same reason I assigned for voting "no" on the other proposition, I vote "no" on this.
Mr. VIEHE, when his name was called, said: Believing the Senate ought not to influence the vote of any senator, I vote "no."
Mr. WOODS, when his name was called, said: I believe this resolution is an attempt to
influence the vote of some senator upon this floor, and, like the other resolution about
the salary grab, it is an improper one to be introduced in this body. I don't think such
a
The result of the vote was then announced as above, and so the resolution was adopted.
Then came the recess till 2 o'clock p.m.
The Senate was not called to order till about 2:30 o'clock, when--
On motion by Mr. Kent, it was ordered that the Senate proceed first to the election of a United States Senator for the term ending the 4th of March next.
A call of the Senate discovered every member present except the Senator from Cass [Mr. Kahlo].
The lieutenant governor announced that nominations were in order.
Mr. Reeve: In obedience to the behests of the Democratic party of Indiana, through her Representatives, without a dissenting voice, and on behalf of that Democracy, I desire to present for the suffrages of this General Assembly the name of a man who to-day perhaps occupies a more prominent position, for the time being, than any other man in our nation; a man whose eloquence has been heard throughout the length and breadth of the land, and who has not only a state but a national reputation; a man who to-day stands upon the floor of the United State Senate--as dignified, intelligent and independent a body as exists in any deliberate organization in the world--a peer of any other member. But remarks are unneccessary--any eulogy is not needed in his case--I nominate Daniel W. Voorhees as a candidate for the office now to be filled by the suffrages of this assembly. [Tremendous applause.]
Mr. Langdon nominated the Hon. Godlove S. Orth.
Mr. Poindexter nominated the Hon. James Buchanan.
There being no other nominations, the ballot resulted: For Mr. Voorhees, 26 votes; for Mr. Orth, 22 votes; for Mr. Buchanan, 1 vote.
Those who voted for Mr. Voorhees were--Messrs. Benz, Briscoe, Burrell, Coffey,Davis, Donham, Foster, Fowler, Hart, Heffron, Kent, Kramer, Leeper, Major, Menzies, Peterson, Reeeve, Reiley, Sarnighausen, Tarlton, Traylor, Urmston, Viehe, Wood Wollen, and Winterbotham--26.
For Mr. Orth--Messrs. Cadwallader, Comstock, Davenport, Dice, Garrigus, Grubbs, Harris, Heilman, Langdon, Mecer, Moore, Oldes, Ragan, Shaffer, Shirk, Smith, Streight, Taylor, Treat, Trusler, Weir, and Wilson--22.
For Mr. Buchanan--Mr. Poindexter--1.
On motion by Mr. Kent, the Senate proceeded to an election of U. S. senator for a term of six years, commencing March 4, 1879.
Nominations being in order--
Mr. Reeve: The confidence of the people has been so repeatedly reposed in the distinguished citizen whose name has been recorded as our chose for U.S. senator for the term ending the 4th of March next, no eulogy is necessary, and I now place him in nomination as the standard bearer of the Democracy of Indiana, to uphold the principles of Democracy on the floor of the United States Senate, as a representative of the State of Indiana, for the six years ensuing, March 4, '79.
Mr. Grubbs: In behalf of the Republican party of Indiana, and as expressing their will, I desire to place in nomination General Benjamin Harrison of Marion County, a soldier, a patriot, and a statesman.
Mr. Poindexter nominated Hon. James Buchanan.
There being no other nominations, the ballot was taken and resulted: For Mr. Voorhees, 26 votes; for Mr. Harrison, 22 votes; for Mr. Buchanan, 1 vote.
The LIEUTENANT GOVERNOR declared Hon. D.W. Voorhees elected on the part of the Senate for the term ending on the 4th of March, 1879, and for the term of six years commencing on the 4th of March, 1879.[Tremendous applause].
Mr. MENZIES moved to reconsider the vote of this morning, adopting the joint resolution.[Mr. Streight's].
On motion of Mr. STREIGHT, this motion was laid on the table--yeas 26, nays 21.
House bill [S. 50--Mr. VIEHE'S] amending section 30 of the justices act of June 9, 1852, so that there shall be but one change of venue, coming up in order, it was read the third time, and finally passed the Senate by yeas 44, nays 1.
The bill [S. 4--Mr. COMSTOCK'S] to abolish the Superior Court of Wayne County, coming up in order, was read the third time, and finally passed the Senate by yeas 46, nays 0.
Bills for acts were introduced, read the first time, and severally referred to appropriate committees, to-wit:
By Mr. VIEHE [S. 195] providing for the redemption of real property or interest therein sold on execution; to provide for deed of conveyance in such case, and to repeal an act therein referred to.
By Mr. STREIGHT [S. 196] regulating the tolls charged on plank or gravel roads located on read beds ceded by the United States to the State of Indiana, and matters properly connected therewith.
By Mr. KENT [S. 197] to protect the ballot box; to procure a fair election, and to prevent the sale and barter of votes.
By Mr. CADWALLADER [S. 198] prescribing certain duties of railroad companies to sound the whistle on all locomotive engines at the crossing of every turnpike or other public highway.
By Mr. BENZ [S. 199] to amend sections 1 and 2 of an act providing for the organization of county boards, approved June 17, 1852.
By Mr. KRAMER [S. 200] to amend an amendatory act to section 613 of the general practice act of June 18, 1852.
By Mr. DICE, by request, [S. 201] to amend section 4 of the act in relation to plank, McAdamized, tram, and gravel road companies, approved March 1, 1855.
By Mr. POINDEXTER,[S. 202] to amend section 26 of the common-school law.
By Mr. COFFEY, [S. 203] providing for the election, selection and implanneling jurors in the circuit courts, their compensation, etc.--$2.50 per day and 10 cents mileage.
By MR. Wilson, [S. 204] fixing the per diem and mileage of members of the General Assembly, and officers and employes.
And then the Senate adjourned.
The House was called to order by the speaker and Mr. Thornburg, one of the representatives from Wayne, opened the session with prayer.
The journal of yesterday's proceedings was being read, when--
On the motion of Mr. Tulley the further reading was dispensed with.
Mr. LEHMAN offered a resolution that hereafter the daily meetings of this House shall be at 9 o'clock--the resolution lies over--under the rules--for one day.
Mr.OSBORNE of Elkhart, from the committee appointed last week to look after
The SPEAKER then continued the call by counties for the introduction of resolutions, bills, etc.
The following described bills for acts were introduced, read the first, time and passed to the second reading.
By Mr. FAULKNER [H. R. 260] to amend section 6 supplemental to an act for the uniform assessment of taxes. He also introduced the following resolution:
Resolved, That the auditor of State be and is hereby instructed to report to this House what amount of taxes have been paid into the State treasury in pursuance of section 6 of an act supplementary and amendatory of an act, entitled an act to provide for a uniform assessment of property, and for the collection and return of taxes thereon--approved December 21, 1872--approved March 8, 1873.
The resolution was adopted.
By Mr. VANPELT [H. R. 261] in relation to hedges along highways [hedges may be set on the line of the road, and a fence left in the road may be placed to guard the hedge for seven years].
By Mr. PERRY [H. R. 262] requiring county commissioners to let the county printing, including the advertising of delinquent tax list, to the lowest bidder.
By Mr. PERRY [H. R. 263] to amend the act for the protection of fish.
By Mr. GINZ [H. R. 264] for the security of laboring men,[mechanical and other labor, in cases of assignment--preferred claims.]
Mr. GAROUTTE offered the following resolution, which was adopted:
That the
By Mr. KESTER [H. R. 265] for a revision of the road law.
By Mr. TAYLOR of Warrick [H. R. 266] to prevent mortgaged property from being run off. He also offered a resolution authorizing the clerk of the House of Representatives to procure the revised statutes for the use of the member of this House, and that the same be returned to the librarian at the close of the session, unless the members are disposed to pay the wholesale price.
Mr. TULLEY hoped the resolution would not prevail. It had been intimated that the statutes would cost the State nothing. He thought they would cost the State near $2,000. Former General Assemblies had passed similar resolutions, yet now there were but very few copies of the statutes belonging to the State that could be used by members of this House. He insisted that members should purchase the statutes for themselves.
Mr. COPELAND said that the House had given a decided expression upon this subject a few days ago, and that subsequently a like resolution was ruled out of order. He submitted figures showing that the door-keeper of the last Legislature had purchased 100 set at a cost to the State of $1,200, and that 59 set returned was sold at $5 per set. He thought this way of voting to themselves statutes was not treating their constituents right. He hoped the resolution would not prevail.
Mr. ALLEN thought workmen should be furnished with tools. The time used upon the discussion of this subject would have paid for these articles over and over again. He insisted that members were entitled to the statutes, and ought to have them, and if members did not want to purchase them at the close of the session, they could return them to the librarian.
Mr. CALDWELL said it was customary to furnish member with these statutes, and he regarded them as necessary to intelligent legislation, especially to those members who were not of the legal profession. He thought it strange, therefore, that the lawyers of this House should try to keep them out of the hands of those who need them. The receipts of members of previous Legislatures who had failed to return the statutes, as provided were in the hands of the proper officials, and should be placed in the hands of the attorney general, with instructions to collect the money for them. If members here agree to return them, he was sure they would do so.
Mr. OWEN was opposed to the resolution, and insisted if members wanted the statutes they should buy them.
Mr. COPELAND made an ineffectual motion to lay the resolution on the table.
The yeas and nays being demanded and taken upon the adoption of the resolution, resulted--yeas 40, nays 35--so the resolution was rejected.
Mr. TULLEY offered a resolution, which was adopted, that the doorkeeper prepare seats on the right of the speaker's chair for senators up on the occasion of the canvass of the votes for the United States senator, fixed for to-morrow.
Mr. TAYLOR of Daviess, [H. R. 267] to repeal an act authorizing towns and townships to aid in the construction of railroads, approved March 12, 1867; also [H. R. 268] defining libel.
The SPEAKER announced that he had signed enrolled bill [H. R. 1] appropriating
$120,000 for Legislative expenses, and asked that bills [H. R. 100 and 101] relating
to insane persons be put upon their second reading. They were read the second time,
and referred to the
Mr. EDWIN offered a resolution, which was adopted, declaring six per cent interest.
A communication from the auditor of State was read, showing the amount of money drawn from the State treasury on account of the Normal School for the past four years, $98,291.75; for the State University, $121,738; for the Purdue University, $33,235.42.
On motion, 150 copies was ordered printed.
The SPEAKER then announced House bills on their second reading.
The following were read the second time and referred to appropriate committees.
Mr. Carey's bill [H. R. 65] to create a State board of health. Also his bill [H. R. 66] for a board of medical examiners.
Mr. Arnold's bill defining body-snatching [H. R. 67].
Mr. Lindley's bill [H. R. 68], deducting bona fide indebtedness from tax assessment.
Mr. Handy's amendment of the divorce law [H. R. 69].
The House took a recess till 2 o'clock.
The SPEAKER announced the order--being bills on their second reading/
The following bills were read the second time and appropriately referred:
Mr. Handy's bill [H. R. 70] to exempt certain small amounts of property from taxation.
Mr. Snoddy's bill [H. R. 71] to abolish the office of supervisor.
Mr. Hubbard's bill [H. R. 72] declaring for 8 per cent interest. Also his bill [H. R. 73] for an asylum for feeble minded children.
On the motion of Mr. Taylor of Daviess, the House then went into an election of United States senator, for the short term--to expire the 3d of March, 1879.
Mr. VAN VALZAH desired to place in nomination one who was in the harts of the people at home as well as throughout the whole country, without regard to political party, etc, etc., Hon. Daniel W. Voorhees. [Applause.]
Mr. OWEN, in behalf of the Republican members, desired to put in nomination for the unexpired term of Senator Morton a man who had the honor of voting for the appropriation of every dollar of that mountain of money that went for the preservation of this Union, etc., etc., etc., Hon. Godlove S. Orth of Tippecanoe County.
Mr. MAJOR, on the part of the Nationals, nominated Hon. James Buchanan of Marion.
The SPEAKER directed the clerk to call the names of members, and in response the member should name the candidate for whom he voted, with roe following result:
Those voting for Mr. Voorhees were--Messrs. Alden, Allen, Baker, Barker, Blackley, Briggs, Brown of Jasper, Bryant, Caldwell, Carter, Compton, Confer, Cunningham, Dailey, Dalton, Davidson, Davis, Drake, Drover, Edwins, English, Faulkner, Flodder, Galbraith, Garoutte, Ginz, Handy, Hart, Hosmer, Humphrey, Huthsteiner, Kester, Lehman, Miers, Mitchell, Nave, Orborn of Elkhart, Perry, Reicheldater, Rooker, Saints, Scholl, Schweitzer, Shauck, Shields, Shutt, Strucker, Taylor of Daviess, Taylor of Warrick, Thompson, Tulley, Vanpelt, Van Valzah, Willard, Wimmer, Works and Mr. Speaker--57.
Those voting for Mr. Orth were--Messrs. Arnold of Grant and Blackford, Arnold of Wabash, Bearss, Brown of Steuben, Casey, Connoway, Connor, Copeland, Donnell, Fancher, Golden, Harland, Herold, Hess, Hopkins, Hebbaard, Kelley, Kirkpartick, Lindley, Marhc, Messick, Overmeyer, Owen, Reed, Robeson, Rodman, Robinson, Shanks, Skinner, Sluth, Snoddy, Stevens, Taylor of Lagrange, Thayer, Thornburg, Vawter, and Watson--37
Those voting for Mr. Buchanan were Messrs. Major and Osborn of Vermillion--2.
Pending the vote Mr. CARTER, when his name was called, said while he was reckoned with the National party he owed his election to the Democrats of his county, and he therefore voted for Hon. Daniel W. Voorhees.
Mr. EDWIN, when his name was called, said it was with pride that he cast all the Democratic votes of Madison County for Hon. Daniel W. Voorhees,
Mr. FAULKNER, when his name was called, said he had worked hard and long for this hour. But for Hon. Daniel W. Voorhees he would not have left his farm-home for a seat in this General Assembly, He felt repaid for all the labor of the canvass in the privilege of casting his vote for Daniel W. Voorhees.
Mr. GORDON, when his name was called, said between the candidates he had not yet made up his mind which one to vote for. He would therefore cast his vote for James M. Shackelford, of Vanderburg County.
Mr. SAINT, when his name was called, said that while he was a member of the Democrat party, he also represented a large portion of tho Nationals of Madison County. He was glad of an opportunity to vote for the man who was bold enough to stand up and tell who were the real enemies of his country. He voted for Daniel W. Voorhees.
Mr. THAYER, when his name was called, said he had been accuse of bolting the Republican nomination. He voted for Hon. Godlove S. Orth.
Mr. WIMMER, when his name way called, said he was a member of the National party, but inasmuch as there was no chance for that party, and as he could not get his choice, he thought it right, to do the next best thing. He voted for Daniel W Voorhees.
The SPEAKER announced the ballot as above, and said it would be spread on the Journal.
Upon the motion of Mr. WILLARD, the House then proceeded to the election of United States Senator for term of six years, from 4th of March, 1879.
Nominations being in order--
Mr. WILLARD: Mr. Speaker, I rise to nominate the next Senator from this State. As
the representatives of the people of Indiana, it is our duty to reflect their desires
and demands in the election of a citizen to this high official position. The people of
Indiana demand that their next Senator shall be a parliamentarian--the peer and
superior of his adversaries on the floor of the Senate. They ask for a champion of the
rights of the West, who is amply able to meet and defeat the representatives of the
gigantic money power of Wall street. They want a financier whose heart is as cold as
the eternal glaciers on the summit of Mount Blanc to the seductive flatteries of
capital. They desire a leader ("Sans peur et sans reproche") fearless in
defence, resistless in attack, and whose name shall carry terror into the ranks of our
opponents--the party of wrong. They wish a statesman whose character is the apothesis
of political honesty, and whose integrity is as immaculate as the plummage of the dove
that descended from the bosom of the Father at the baptism of the Jordan. The people
of Indiana demand that we shall elect as our Senator a man who shall recall our great
leaders of the past, one who is a supporter of the grandest political principles ever
enunciated by mortal lips, "Equal and exact justice toward all men; exclusive
privileges to none." That principle forms the basis of our institutions, the
impelling force of our progress, the crowning glory of our nation, and its supporters
in the past are associated with all that is noble in our history. Beneath the
encircling elms of Montecello rests in peace the great author of that principle,
Thomas Jefferson. Where roll in endless summer the bright blue waves of the
Chesapeake, in their own loved Virginia, lie buried its great defenders, Madison and
Monroe. The plumed palmetto nods in tropical beauty above the tomb of Carolina's
gifted orator, John C. Calhoun. The birds that carol in the groves of the Hermitage
sing their songs above the mortal remains of the lion hearted Tennessean, Andrew
Jackson. "By the now of inland river" Missouri's greatest statesman, Thomas
Hart Benton, "Sleeps the sleep that knows no waking," That river of poetry
and romance, the Susquehanna, as it laps the banks of Lancaster, lulls with its murmur
the ashes of Pennsylvania's great diplomist, James Buchanan. By the shore of the
mighty lakes, a magnificent mausoleum and a marble cenotaph pointing heaven word
record the virtues of the greatest political leader of them all--the little giant,
Stephen A. Douglass. Though these great supporters of tin's principle have passed
into the illuminations of history, though political contests have shaken the country,
though wars and revolutions have convulsed our Government, the principle, "Equal
and exact justice toward all men exclusive privileges to none," fresh as on its
natal morn, still remains an eternal bulwark to a nation's liberties, grounded into
the hearts of the people, and to-day finds its grandest cham[pion]-
Mr. Speaker, in behalf not of the Democracy on this floor, but in the name of the people of Indiana by fifty thousand majority, I place in nomination as the next senator from this State the grandest parliamentarian of the latter half of the nineteenth century, the truest friend of the people in this whole broad land, the brilliant orator who has thrilled a continent with his eloquence, Daniel W. Voorhees.
Mr. GORDON intimated that he was not always in the minority. Party devotion with him had long since been dead. He arose to nominate a man on whose character there was not the slightest stain, a man who was in a lucrative office when the country was imperiled and needed soldiers, and who left that office for a lieutenant's commission and served his country during that imperiled period , and was one of the members with General Sherman on that memorable march to the sea. He nominated General Benjamin Harrison.
Mr. MAJOR nominated the Hon. James Buchanan.
The ballot resulted as in the previous vote except that Mr. Gordon voted for Gen. Benj. Harrison.
The speaker announced the result,stating that the same would be spread upon the journal.
The House then adjourned.
After the order of prayer by the senator from Monroe and Lawrence [Rev.W. B. F. Treat].
This being Wednesday, under the rules the first order of business is the consideration of bills on the third reading. There being none on the calendar, the next thing in order is bills on the second reading.
The bill [S. 16--Mr. Dice's] in relation to change of venue in preliminary cases before justices of the peace, coming up with a committee report, recommending its indefinite postponement--
Mr. DICE thought the report was incorrect in stating that the provisions of this bill are embraced in the bill S. 50. This bill provides against a change of venue in preliminary examinations, while the bill S. 50 does not. He favored the passage of the bill.
Mr. REEVE: The object of the committee was to prevent accumulative legislation. To enable the senator to have a fair chance, he was willing this one should be laid on the table.
Mr. KENT was also of opinion that the object in this bill sought was not embraced in the bill S. 50, which contemplates two actions. A preliminary examination is not a trial. He moved the bill be recommitted for further examination. There ought to be some legislation on this question.
Mr. VIEHE favored the motion to recommit. In many cases it is important a partial trial should be had on preliminary examination.
The motion to recommit was agreed to.
The bill [S. 63--Mr. Davenport's] supplementary to the act to exempt property from sale in certain cases, with a committee report recommending indefinite postponement, was then taken up.
Mr. REEVE said there were some matters of importance embraced in this bill, and he moved its recommitment for further examination.
The motion was agreed to.
The bill [S.110--Mr. Cadwallader's] to amend the act declaring agreements to pay
attorneys' fees on any evidence of indebtedness illegal, with a report from a
majority of the
Mr. KENT thought the time has come to abolish all such agreements to pay attorneys' fees.
Mr. MENZIES hoped the majority report would not be concurred in.
Mr. VIEHE--The
Mr. REEVE--The
Mr. WEIR, moved the recommitment of the bill to the
Mr. WOOD favored the majority report. There should be no law preventing the citizen from making any contract he thinks fit.
Mr. BRISCOE was always opposed to the attorney fee clause. It is compulsion. It drives the borrower to make an agreement to pay attorney fees. He favored the minority report.
Mr. BURRELL opposed recommitment. The Senate is us well prepared now to vote upon tins question as it will be a week or two hence, and it should be settled now. The system that compels a man to pay usury in the shape of attorney's fees, has and will work hardships. It makes the creditor less able to pay the whole amount, and prudence and justice alike demand the adoption of the minority report
Mr. WOOLLEN hoped the report of the min-[ority]
Mr HART'S constituents are demanding the repeal of these attorneys' fees, and he should do every thing to advance that end.
Mr. SHAFFER, desired a vote on the minority report.
Mr. STREIGHT: History will show that as often as the country is involved in financial difficulties the people resort to legislative aid to fix the value of money. There is no greater folly than to support the debtor class will be benefitted by restricting them as to what they shall pay for money. One of the chief benefits of government is to enforce honest contracts. Would you cut off the privilege of the borrower on the best terms he could? A measure so intimately connected with our best interests should be considered from a business standpoint. You can not make a provision that will compel the lender to put out his money on less terms than are satisfactory to him. Senators may say their constituencies are clamoring for the passage of this bill, but his constituencies are demanding that collections laws shall be made short, safe and sure, and are against hampering conditions on which money may be loaned. With our loose collection laws and the Government offering a bond at four percent., without taxes, who is going to loan money at six per cent.? When you fix it so any one controlling idle capital can better afford to buy government bonds than loan to a neighbor, the borrowing class will find there is no money to loan. If you pass no laws to drive capital out of the State, there may be found men who will loan at a rate that a needy borrower can get relief on reasonable terms
Mr. SARNIGHAUSEN: If the lender has to pay attorney's fees on short loans he cannot get his money back. Is that just and fair?
Mr. COFFEY favored the minority report All such contracts should be declared null and void. Such stipulations now are indefinite and uncertain, and unjust to the borrower. For this reason he opposed the present law.
Mr. GARRIGUS: Shall we attempt to protect everybody against the consequences of their own contracts? The next measure proposed by advocates of this will probably be to do away with the valuation and appraisement law, which is a very benificent measure. That would naturally follow, and there is more reason in this than in the measure proposed by the minority report. The question should be: What will benefit the people? The people are almost all in the hands of creditors who hold iron-clad notes. Reduce interest to six per cent., strike out the right to pay attorney's fees, and where will the money go? You will make nugatory the declaration that we want more money. It only will go where it can command better rates. As a friend to the people of his native State, he would not aid in driving capitalists and capital away.
Mr. FOSTER opposed adoption of the minority report, and for fear it has not been
properly investigated by the
Mr. OLDS: The bill ought not to pass, for it takes away the right of parties to contract as they please for the loan of money. If there is any necessity for legislating in favor of parties who can not take care of themselves guardians should be appointed to make contracts to borrow money for such. It is saying the people shall make only such contracts for money as we shall dictate. The same right should prevail in the making of contracts for the use of money as for any other contract the citizen is capable of entering into. He favored the motion to recommit.
Mr. SHIRK: The
Mr. REEVE believed this bill embodies a fundamental principle which demands carefu1 consideration. It is a measure embodying class legislation, which is seldom recognized when it presents itself. Now is the time for senators to decide this question. An absurd idea is maintained by some that there can a conflict between capital and labor. Such conflict is precipitated by class legislation, and when that comes labor is starved to submission and capital is reduced to a position where it is comparatively useless.
Law is made for the preservation of public order. Every law that takes away the rights of the private citizen is tyranny.
Here the speaker was interrupted by the appearance at the bar of the Senate of a committee from the House of Representatives, commissioned to escort, the Senate to the hall of the House for the purposes of a joint convention to canvass the votes cast yesterday in each body separately for United States Senator. The Senate thereupon left the chamber. When senators had returned, Mr. Reeve gave way for the recess till 2 o'clock p. m.
Mr REEVE, resuming the floor, continued his remarks at considerable length. This class of legislation he desired to meet at the threshold, and plead with Senators to take no step in that direction, directly or indirectly, for therein lies danger. We should pause even on this little bill, for it is an entering wedge to class legislation, and that is the thunderbolt that will rend to fragments any form of government
Mr. STREIGHT: If this bill were to pass, the debtor would be denied the right to renew his obligation, and in a majority of cases the creditor will demand judgment in accordance with the obligation as it now stands. This is the most important point connected with this bill
Mr KENT: The objections raised by the senator from Marshall [Mr Reeve] can be very easily answered. Is it true that the repeal of the law authorizing the collection of attorney's fees is class legislation? If so, what kind of legislation was it that passed the act permitting attorney's fees to be collected on promissory notes? The provision as it now stands is absolute--it does not depend upon the question as to whether or not suit is brought. The senator talks about class legislation. We have had it for the last ten or fifteen years, and it has been in favor of the rich man and against the poor. The men who have money to loan have it in their power to compel the poor borrower to comply with their terms. The first duty of the Government is to pass such laws as will restrain the strong and protect the weak. We should go back to the fundamental principle of Government itself, and insist that laws be passed for restraining the strong and for protecting the weak.
Mr. Winterbotham: In the session of 1875 the Legislature was flooded with petitions
asking that the attorney's fee clause be stricken from such contracts, and in
accordance with such petitions a law was passed with that intention, that was partly
set aside by a decision
The motion to recommit was rejected--yeas 15; nays 29.
A motion, [Mr. Olds], to lay the minority report on the table was rejected--yeas 19;
nays 25; the minority report was rejected--yeas 21; nays 23--; the majority report,
was concurred in, and so the bill was referred to the
Mr. OLDS introduced a bill [S. 205] to provide against unjust charges by surgeons and physicians for services rendered, and against excessive charges by farmers. Surgeons not to charge to exceed $5 for an operation, phyisicians 50 cents for prescriptions--each five cents mile age. Farmers not to sell wheat for more than 50 cents per bushel; corn, 25 cents: oats, 15 cents, clover seed, $3; timothy seed, 75 cents; and charges for any amount in excess shall be illegal and void. [Laughter.]
The bill [S. 125--Mr. Foster's, by request] for the conviction of persons in possession of stolen property coming up, with a committee amendment, it was concurred in, and the bill ordered engrossed for the third reading.
The bill [S. 121--Mr. Trusler's] to repeal section 2 of the misdemeanor [provoke] act of March 22, 1855, coming up, with a committee report recommending indefinite postponement--
The report was concurred in by--yeas 21, nays 18.
The bill [S. 100--Mr. Kent's] reducing the number of grand jurors to three freholders and voters, coming up in order, a committee recommendation that it be indefinitely postponed was concurred in.
The bill [S. 78--Mr. Shirk's] to amend section 344 of the general practice act, described in these reports of the 14th inst., was read the second time, with a committee report that it lie on the table.
On motion by Mr. SHIRK it was recommitted.
Mr. BURRELL introduced a bill [S. 206] to repeal section 6 and amend section 16 of an act concerning promissory notes, approved March 11.1861.
A message from the House of Representatives announcing the passage by that body of a joint resolution instructing senators and requesting Indiana's delegation in Congress to favor the granting of pensions to the veterans of the Mexican war, was made simultaneously with the appearance at the bar of the Senate of those Mexican war veterans now attending a convention in this city, in pursuance of am invitation extended by a resolution adopted this afternoon, offered by Mr. Menzies, by the terms of which the lieutenant governor announced a recess of ten minutes. After the time had expired he resumed the chair and spoke words of greeting to the veterans, extending to them, in behalf of the Senate, the privileges of the floor.
General Mahlon D, Manson, in behalf of his comrades, thanked the Senate for the compliment paid them, and referred to many victories won by the American soldiers on Mexican soil 33 years ago.
Major Jonathan W. Gordon, in response to persistent calls, also made a little speech, in Which he referred in tender terms to many who have passed over on the other side.
On motion by Mr. Menzies the message just received from the House of Representatives was taken up and the resolution passed unanimously.
And then the Senate adjourned.
The SPEAKER called the House to order. The order of prayer being omitted.
The journal of yesterday was being read, when on motion the further reading was dispensed with.
A report from the superintendent of the Soldiers' Orphan Home was being read,when--
MR. OSBORNE of Elkhart moved that the reading be dispensed with, and two hundred copies be printed for the use of the House. It was so ordered.
The SPEAKER laid before the House a communication from the auditor shewing that he had complied with a resolution of the House directing him to furnish county officers with blanks on which to return an itemized statement of the amount of monies received by them on account of the transportation of prisoners, hack hire, etc.
The following bills were read a second time and referred to appropriate committees:
Mr. Overmeyer's bill [H. R. 74] to establish a board of pardon. Also his bill [H. R. 75] limiting the time for appeals to the supreme court.
Mr. Lehman's bill [H. R. 76] to amend the justices' act, of June, 1852. Also his bill [H. R. 77] to amend the act prescribing the powers and duties of justices of the peace.
Mr. Brown of Jasper's bill [H. R. 78] concerning sending prisoners to the jails of other counties,
Mr. Dalton's bill [H. R. 79] for the assessment of real property.
Mr. Shield's bill [H. R. 80] to amend sec. 420 of the general practice act. Also his bill [H. R. 81] for the assessment and taxation of telegraph companies. Also his bill [H. R. 82] regulating foreign express companies.
Mr. Connor's bill [H. R. 83] for a lien upon horses or other domestic property, for keeping the same. Also his bill [H. R. 84] to encourage the growing of oak, ash, walnut and other forest trees, and exempting lands from taxation when so appropriated. Also his bill [H. R. 85] regulating special contracts for labor--must give notice before discharging employes. Also his bill [H. R. 86] regulating the sale of butter.
Mr. Gordon's bill [H. R. 87] to amend section 250 of an act to provide for uniform assessment of property. Also his bill [H. R. 88] defining vagrancies and other offences. Also his bill [H. R. 80] touching contempt of court.
Mr. Herod's bill [H. R. 90] defining libel. Also his bill [H. R. 91] married women may control their property and labor the same as if unmarried--to convey real estate must be joined by her husband.
A message from the Senate announced the passage by that body of a current resolution instructing our representatives in Congress to use all honorable means to prevent the repeal of the resumption law.
Mr. Herod's bill [H. R. 92] limiting the time for actions against sureties. Also his bill [H. R. 93] for assessing and taxing of building and loan associations. Also his bill [H. R. 94] regulating the carrying of concealed weapons. Also his bill [H. R. 95] indemnifying sheriffs and others in the execution of process upon property. Also his bill [H. R. 96] regulating the inspection of petroleum. Also his bill [H. R 97] justices may appoint constables. Also his bill [H. R. 98] to prevent stock running at large. Also his bill [H. R. 99] making the State officers a council of pardon.
Mr. English's bill [H. R. 102] grading fees and salaries of county officers.
Mr. Confer's bill (H. R. 103] to amend the 44th. section of an act fixing the
fees of witnesses
Mr. Mier's bill, [H. R. 105] regulating the practice of dentistry. Also his bill, [H. R. 106] for three special judicial districts and their judges.
Mr. TAYLOR of Davies, offered a resolution that the house now prepare for the reception of senators in the joint convention for the comparison of votes for United States senator.
The resolution was adopted, and accordingly the members on the right of the speaker's chair vacated their seats for the accommodation of senators.
Senators being seated the lieutenant governor took the chair and called the joint convention to order.
He declared the first thing in order to be the reading of the journals of yesterday afternoon of both houses--
The secretary of the Senate then read from the Senate journal of yesterday that part relating to the election of the United States senator for the unexpired term,
The Clerk of the House of Representatives then read a corresponding part of the journal of the House yesterday.
The LIEUTENANT GOVERNOR then announced that inasmuch as Daniel W. Voorhees had received twenty-six votes in the Senate and also fifty-seven votes in the House of Representatives--being a majority of all the votes cast, he declared him duly elected Senator for the short term to expire the 3d day of March 1879.
That part of the journals of both Houses relating to the nomination of United Slates Senator for the long term was then read in the order above named.
The LIEUTENANT GOVERNOR stated that as Daniel W. Voorhees had received a majority of the votes of Senators as shown by the journal just read, and as Daniel W. Voorhees, the same person,had received fifty-seven votes in the House of Representatives, being a majority of all the votes cast as shown by the Journals of the two Houses just read, he declared Daniel W. Voorhees the United States Senator for a term of six years beginning with the 4th day of March 1879.
He then said that inasmuch as the business for which the joint convention had assembled was finished, he declared the convention adjourned.
The House then took a recess till 2 o'clock.
The SPEAKER resumed at 2 o'clock, and announced the order--bills on their second reading.
The following bills were read a second time and appropriately referred.
Mr. Mier's bill [H. R. 107] to amend an act providing for the election of justices of the peace, and prescribing their jurisdiction. Also his bill [H. R. 108] in relation to contested elections.
Mr. Thompson's bill (H. R. 109] creating the Forty-Second Judicial Circuit. Also his bill [H. R. 110] prohibiting Judges, clerks of criminal courts, Justices of the Peace, Auditors, Treasurers, Sheriffs and their deputies from practicing law.
Mr. Schwitzer offered a resolution, which was adopted, that a committee be appointed to Invite the organization of the Veteran soldiers of the Mexican war, now in session in this city, to seats on this floor.
Subsequently the SPEAKER made the committee to consist of Messrs. Schwitzer, Gordon and Van Valzah.
Mr. Hart's bill [H. R. 111] to discourage the keeping of useless and sheep killing dogs.
Mr. Osborne's, of Elkhart, bill [H. R. 112] to provide for the election of trustees for the Insane, Blind and Deaf and Dumb Asylums. Also, his bill [H. R. 114] to legalize and make valid certain building, loan and saving associations, and to extend the time of organization.
Mr. CONNOR offered an amendment extending the existence of building associations for five years, providing that assessments and interest on stock now surrendered shall not be made beyond the eight years for which the associations were organized. He said the proposed bill would impair the obligation of contracts.
The bill and amendment were then referred to the
Mr. Schwitzer's bill [H. R. 115] to amend section 1 of an act to provide for the observance of the Sabbath.
Mr. Major's bill [H. R. 116] prohibiting judgments being rendered upon contract waiving valuation or appraisement laws. Also, his bill [H. R. 117] regulating interest on money.
Mr. WORKS' bill, [H. R. 118] to divide the State into judicial circuits; also his bill, [H. R. 119] to amend the act in relation to justices of the peace; also his bill [H. R. 120] concerning evidence to be given by defendant for libel or slander.
Mr. ALLEN'S bill,[H. R. 121] in relation to foreign corporations holding mortgages; also his bill, [H. R. 122] to authorize cities and towns to sell bonds for the erection of school houses; also his bill, [H. R. 123] disqualifying citizens of incorporated cities as electors for township trustees, and to render ineligible township trustees who are residents of any such city; also his bill, [H. R. 124] touching duties of township trustees; also his bill, [H. R. 126] regulating interest on money; also his bill [H. R. 126] relating to foreign corporations.
Mr. WATSON'S bill, [H. R. 127]for homestead exemption; also his bill. [H. R. 128] regulating bonds of administrators or guardians.
Mr. FAULKNER'S bill, [H. R. 129] for the more speedy trial of causes in the courts; also his bill, [H. R. 130] fixing salaries of the judges of the Criminal Court.
Mr. Sleeth's bill [H. R. 131] to amend the general practice act. Also his bill [H. R. 132] prescribing the duty of administrators.
Pending the reading of this bill--
Mr. GORDON (entering the side door in advance of the veterans of the Mexican war) said: "Mr. Speaker, I am directed by the chairman of the committee appointed to invite the veterans of the Mexican war to a seat in this hall, to say that they have performed that duty, and the veterans are here ready to avail themselves of the invitation of the House of Representatives."
On motion of Mr. FAULKNER the House took a recess for 15 minutes, in order that members may make the acquaintance of these sellers of the Mexican war
The SPEAKER, when the time of the recess had expired, commanded order, the veterans being seated promiscuously among members, He welcomed the veterans of the Mexican war to seats upon the floor. He wished that they would make themselves at home, as every privilege of the House was by resolution extended to them.
General Mahlon D. Manson was then called for, and responded in behalf of the veterans, recounting some of their battles and referring to the results in the acquisition of territory to the United States.
Major Jonathan W. Gordon being called on recited his experience, illustrating with an anecdote which was pleasant and acceptable.
Mr. BRIGGS offered a resolution, which was adopted, instructing our representatives
in Congress to use their influence for the passage
Mr. GORDON said that he understood the Senate was now ready for the reception of the veterans, and would conduct them into the Senate Chamber.
Mr. OSBORNE of Elkhart offered a resolution, which was adopted, that the Auditor of State be requested to furnish, for the use of the House a statement showing in detail the pay, compensation and perquisites received by the Auditor, Treasurer, Secretary of state, Attorney General, Superintendent of Public Instruction, Clerk and Reporter of the Supreme Court, for 1878.
Mr. Briggs' bill [H. R. 133] fixing the time when cases shall stand for issue and trial. Also his bill [H. R. 134] for 6 per cent, interest. Also his bill [H. R. 135] legalizing the acts of the board of the town of Shelborne.
Mr. Perry's bill [H. R. 136] for the protection of fish.
Mr. Baker's bill [H. R. 137] concerning the rights of married women.
Mr. Garroutte's bill [H. R. 138] requiring township trustees to appropriate any surplus funds now on hand to the benefit of the road fund.
Mr. Van Valzah's bill [H. R. 139] to change the time when city taxes shall become a lien. Also his bill [H. R. 140] to legalize the annexation of lands to cities and towns.
Mr. Taylor's of Warrick bill [H. R. 141] to legalize the board of the town of Boonville.
Mr. Mitchell's bill [H. R. 142] to fix and regulate the salaries of county officers,
The House then adjourned.
The session was opened, with prayer by Dr. LEA W. MUNLALL, of this city, of the M. E. church.
The LIEUTENANT GOVERNOR announced the standing committee on reapportionment of the State for senatorial and representative purposes, viz.: Messrs. Viehe, Moore, Sarnighausen, Grubbs, Reeve, Langdon, Davis, Urmston, Hellman, Winterbotham, Garrigus, Tarlton and Coffey; also, the standing committee on reapportionment of the State for congressional purposes: Messrs Burrell, Taylor, Menzies, Olds, Fowler, Harris, Kent, Comstock, Hefron, Mercer, Wood, Smith and Reiley.
Several of the standing committees of the Senate returned a number of Senate bills--a dozen and a half or two dozen--with a report on each embracing the judgment and recommendation of the committee returning it which reports, at the suggestion of the lieutenant governor, were placed on the files without reading, this order to be continued unless set aside by the action of the Senate.
Mr. BRISCOE offered the following resolution, which was adopted:
Resolved, That the auditor of State is hereby required to request of each and every county auditor, treasurer, sheriff and clerk in the State of Indiana, under oath, a full and complete exhibit of his salary, fees, emoluments and perquisites received, by him or his predecessor for the year 1878, and also a full statement, under oath, of all expenditures of every kind and nature--the name and number of clerks or assistants employed by each, with the true amount paid to each and for what service rendered, for and during the year 1878, showing the net proceeds or profits accruing from said respective office; said information to be furnished to the State auditor before the 15th day of February, 1879.
Mr. VIEHE declared the purport of the resolution to be all right, but in order to obtain this information if; would be necessary to pass an act requiring these questions to be answered; and because of that he opposed passage of the resolution.
Mr. GRUBBS--If there is anything needed by members of this Assembly it is information in regard to fees and salaries of county officers, Senators know nothing of the fees and salaries of county officers other than what they may have picked up in their own counties or districts. If this resolution is adopted, and officers do not respond, and in acting upon the best information we are able to obtain, we do them injustice, it is not our fault, but theirs, because we have called upon them to give us information we desire, and which we need, and if they do not give it to us the responsibility will rest with them. Therefore this is a resolution in the right direction. It is not mandatory. If these officials shall choose to give the information asked for, they can; if they don't we should act as best, we can without it.
Mr. REEVE offered a concurrent resolution, which was adopted, instructing senators and requesting Indiana's representatives in Congress to procure the enactment of a law requiring plaintiffs in all cases where judgment is rendered in Federal courts against residents in this State, to cause a brief memoranda of the judgment to be sent to the clerk of the circuit court in which defendant resides, to be entered on the judgment docket.
Mr. WILSON offered a resolution instructing the
It was adopted.
Mr. TRUSLER offered a resolution requesting the
Mr. VIEHE: The Senator (Mr. Trusler) is mistaken when he intimates the object is delay.
The
Mr. OLDS: This resolution ought not to pass. The
Mr. REEVE would submit at no time and in no place to an open charge of corruption in
the discharge of duty. If this Senate adopts a resolution, the import of which declares,
as its author has said, to censure the
On motion of Mr. STREIGHT the resolution was laid on the table.
Mr. RAGAN offered a resolution that speeches be limited to five minutes.
On motion of Mr. HARRIS it was laid on the table.
Mr. GARRIGUS offered the following:
Resolved by the Senate of the State of Indiana, That in accordance with rule 53, and to make the same more useful and effective, that the senator introducing a bill shall be notified when his bill will be considered by such committee, and no bill shall be adversely passed upon by such committee unless its author be so notified. It shall be the duty of the chairman of each committee to cause such notice to be given.
On motion by Mr. BURRELL it was laid on the table.
The following described bills for acts were introduced, read the first time and referred to appropriate committees:
By Mr. SARNIGHAUSEN, [S. 207] to provide for the determination and allowance of claims against the State.
By Mr. KRAMER, [S. 208] supplementary and amendatory of valuation and assessment and property taxation acts.
By Mr. BENZ, [S. 209] to provide for appeals from boards of county commissioners.
By Mr. TARLETON, [S. 210] to prevent swine from running at large.
By Mr. WlNTERBOTHAM, [S. 211] interest on money to be at any rate on which parties may agree.
By Mr. MAJOR, [S. 212] declaring agreements to waive valuation and appraisement laws in any written or printed evidence of indebtedness to be illegal, null and void.
By Mr. POINDEXTER, by request, [S. 213] to divide the state into congressional districts.
By Mr. WILSON, [S. 214] supplementary to acts prescribing the duties and qualifications of coroners.
By Mr. BRISCOE, [S. 215] to Increase the exemption of property from sale on executions to $600.
By Mr. TRAYLOR [S. 216] to amend section 1 of the act of December 21,1865, defining the crime of embezzlement.
By Mr. HART, [S. 217] to amend section 467 of the general practice act--thirty day's notice shall be given of all sales on execution by the posting of written notices only.
By Mr. POINDEXTER, by request, [S. 218] to amend section 8 of the general act for the incorporation of cities--common council may appoint marshals.
By Mr. TAYLOR, [S. 219] to amend section 529 of the general practice act--to provide for the manner of enforcing liens.
By Mr. URMSTON, [S. 220] to fix the number of senators and representatives to the General Assembly--50 senators and 100 representatives.
By Mr. TREAT, [S. 221] granting the privilege of remonstrance by citizens of cities, towns, townships and wards against the sale of intoxicating liquors therein.
Pending the introduction of bills--
On motion, and for the purpose of giving the several standing committees an opportunity to meet and consider the mass of matter referred for their action, it was ordered that when the Senate adjourns it be till to-morrow morning.
Mr. LANGDON offered a resolution, which was adopted, that all bills on legislative and congressional apportionment be printed upon the first reading.
And then the Senate adjourned till 10 o'clock to-morrow, under the order above set forth.
The SPEAKER called the House to order, and stated that the session would be opened with prayer by the Representative from Hendricks, Mr Snoody.
The reading of the journal proceeded until--
On the motion of Mr. HEROD the further reading was discontinued.
The SPEAKER said that inasmuch as a member of the
were presented and severally concurred in, unless otherwise stated, as follows:
Mr. BRIGGS, from the
Mr. ALLEN, from the
Mr. COMPTON from the
Mr. OSBORNE of Elkhart, from the
Also in regard to the constitutionality of the pay of employes, that there was now no law to regulate the pay of employees. The committee recommended a bill [H. R. 269] prescribing the number of officers and employee and fixing their salaries.
He said that for the want of time the committee were unable to ascertain what offices were vacant in the benevolent institutions, and consequently were unwilling to report definately on this subject.
The SPEAKER announced the call by counties for the introduction of resolutions and bills.
The following described bills were introduced, read the first time and passed to the second reading.
By Mr. DAILEY, [H. R. 270] for the protection of the ballot box and to prevent bribery.
By Mr. COMPTON, [H. R. 271] to amend sections 1, 2, 4 and 5 of an act authorizing Street Car companies to use street highways, etc.
By Mr. Donnell, [H. R. 272] to limit prosecutions under State and city laws.
By Mr. MARCH, [H. R. 273] prescribing forms of deeds for sheriffs or coroners. Also, [H. R. 274] to amend section 1 of an act to limit the number of grand jurors to six free holders.
By Mr. WILLARD, [H. R. 275] to prevent fishing in ponds on enclosed lands.
By Mr. CONNOWAY, [H. R. 276] to create the------circuit and for dividing the State into judicial circuits.
By Mr. DAVIDSON, [H. R. 277] to amend an act providing for a general system of common schools.
By Mr. HUMPHREYS, [H. R. 278] to exempt $500 worth of property from sale on execution.
By Mr. KIRKPATRICK, [H. R. 279] providing for the giving notice to non-residents.
By Mr. ROOKER, [H. R. 280] fixing the standard grade and toll on macadamized, gravel or other roads [grade, one foot in every 44 feet.]
By Mr. WIMMER, [H. R. 281] to amend section 2 of an act providing for a geological survey and State geologist. Also, [H. R. 282] regulating the salary of the superintendent of public instruction [$1,500]. Also, [H. R. 283] to amend section 1 of the act relating to salaries of public officers.
By Mr. BROWN, [H. R. 284] to enable owners Of lands to clean out ditches where the same can not be done without injury to adjoining lands.
By Mr. GOLDEN, [H. R. 285] defining libel. Also, [H. R. 286] supplemental to an act prescribing the duties of coroners [abolishing coroners' jurors].
Mr. OVERMEYER offered the following resolution, which was adopted: That the
He also offered a resolution, which was adopted, setting forth the cost of the State
Normal School, State University and Purdue University for the four years ending
October 31, 1878, to be $253,244.75; that the tax-payers have received no
corresponding benefit; that it was the duty of the State to provide common schools,
but not her duty to provide colleges; that the Purdue University was amply endowed,
and that the
By Mr. THAYER, [H. R. 287] to abridge the duties of county superintendent, examiner or trustee. Also [H. R. 288] to regulate freights on railroads.
By Mr. DALTON, [H. R. 289] to amend an act providing for the election of justice of the peace, and prescribing jurisdiction. Also [H. R. 290] regulating the running at large of domestic animals.
By Mr. TAYLOR, of Lagrange, [H. R. 291] to amend sec. 17 of an act to provide for a general system of common schools. Also, [H. R. 292] to amend section 3 of an act to provide for a general system of common schools. Also [H. R. 293] defining certain felonies.
By Mr. EDWINS, [H. R. 294] to regulate and provide dead bodies for use in colleges, and to suppress grave robbing.
By Mr. ENGLISH, [H. R. 295] for a metropolitan police in cities of 30,000 inhabitants, and to abolish the office of city marshal.
[Title and emergency section omitted.]
Then came the recess till 2 o'clock.
Mr. Willard offered a resolution which was adopted. That the chairman of the
On the motion of Mr. Edwins the special order--the consideration of the proposed constitutional amendments--was postponed until next Wednesday afternoon at 2:30 o'clock.
The SPEAKER then continued the call by counties for resolution, bills, etc.
By Mr. CONNOR [H. R. 296] to fix the rate of travel in sleeping cars.
By Mr. GORDON [H. R. 297] to regulate the practice of medicine, Also [H. R. 298] to amend the act to authorize and erect a new State House.
By Mr. ROBINSON [H. R. 299] to prevent persons who are mortgagors of goods and chattels, and who by the terms of the mortgage retain possession of the same, from running off or hiding such goods.
Mr. MAJOR offered a resolution, which was adopted, declaring for a road commissioner to take charge of the free gravel roads.
By Mr. MIERS, [H. R. 300] to allow horse and street railway companies to run dummies.
By Mr. RODMAN. [H. R. 301] to amend an act to exempt property in certain cases from execution. [$1,000.]
By Mr. HUTHSTEINER,[H. R. 302] authorizing towns to pay salaries to librarians of public library; also [H. R. 303] to legalize the acts of the board of trustee of Tell City, in Perry County.
Also, a joint resolution, instructing our Representatives in Congress to use their
influence for the relief of banks from the necessity of
By Mr. KELLEY, [H. R. 301] to amend section three of an act to regulate the sale of intoxicating liquors; also [H. R. 305] to prevent false and fictitious signatures to remonstrances.
By Mr. SLEETH, [H. R. 306] to require trustees of express trusts to record deeds in the county where the largest amount of property lies.
By Mr. SLEETH, [H. R. 307] to amend section 9 of an act to divide the State for judicial purposes.
By Mr. BRIGGS, [H. R. 308] to amend section 1 of the act declaring agreements to pay attorneys' fees in any evidence of indebtedness illegal and void--not to apply to contracts made previous to the taking effect of this act,
By Mr. OSBORN of Vermillion, [H. R. 309] in relation to partition of real-estate, and supplementary to an act in relation thereto.
By Mr. ARNOLD, [H. R. 310] authorizing sheriffs and constables to follow defendant into an adjoining county and make an arrest.
By Mr. HARLAN, [H. R. 311] to punish tramps--by imprisonment in State's prison, not to exceed fifteen months; if found with deadly weapons, not to exceed two years; if convicted of more serious offences, five years: informers to be rewarded.
By Mr MITCHELL, [H. R. 312] to authorize a seat for the adjutant general--all records of the Morgan raid to be filed in his office. Also [H. R. 313] to provide a more speedy way of listing for assessment of personal property, and amending the act of December, '72, for the assessment of property: -assessor to attend all voting places to take lists of property liable to taxation.
Mr TAYLOR of Daviess a resolution for instructing and requesting the Indian
delegation in Congress to secure the enactment of a law declaring children by
polygamous marriages legitimate. It was referred to the
By Mr. HART, [H. R. 314] to amend section 10 of the common school law, and declaring the manner in which trustees shall employ school teacher's--teachers to be elected by each school district.
The SPEAKER laid before the House a communication from officers of the Indiana Orphans' Home in response to a resolution of the House in regard to supplies purchased for said Home in the years 1877-8. The account may be found in printed reports which will be furnished.
Mr. TULLEY offered a resolution that 2,000 copies of the governor's report of pardons, commutations, etc., be printed for the use of the House,
Mr. OVERMEYER moved to strike out 2,000 and insert 200, which was agreed to.
The resolution as amended was laid on the table.
The SPEAKER laid before the House a communication from trustees of the Normal School stating that their printed report will furnish information called for by resolution of the House.
The communication also set out other expenditures not printed in the report.
The communication was referred to
The bill [S. 4] to repeal the act establishing a superior court in the county of Wayne was read the first time.
The bill [S. 50] to amend Sec. 20 of the justice's act--with reference to changes of venue--but one granted to the same party--was read the first time.
The Senate concurrent resolution for instruction and request of Indiana congressmen to oppose repeal of the resumption act, which went into effect January 1, 1879, coming up--
Mr. OVERMEYER thought the House might as well take the vote now on the resolution.
Mr. WILLARD moved to lay the resolution on the table, which was agreed to by--yeas 50, nays 34.
Mr. HEROD offered a resolution, which was adopted, authorizing the clerk to keep a letter heads (lithographed) and envelopes for use of committees of the House.
By Mr. SAINT [H. R. 315] to amend secs. 3, 4, 13 and 16 of the liquor law, so as to require a petition signed by a majority of male citizens and voters of the ward or precinct before license shall be granted.
Mr. BRIGGS offered a concurrent resolution instructing our senators and requesting our representatives in Congress to endeavor to secure a modification of the revenue laws so as to allow to sell tobacco grown by themselves in small quantities.
Was referred to the
The bills [H. R. 143--Mr. Mitchell's] to divide the state into congressional districts; [H. R. 144--Mr. Owen's] for the collection of damages growing out of the sale of intoxicating liquors from the seller and owner of the building, jointly: [H. R. 145--Mr. Owen's] to regulate the sale of intoxicating liquors--to be submitted to the voters of the township; [H. R. 146--Mr. Tulley's] bona fide indebtedness to be deducted from property listed for taxation; [H. R. 147--Mr. Tulley's] to enable married women whose husband is insane, to hold property exempt from taxation; [H. R. 148--Mr. Tulley's] to legalize sales of real estate in certain cass; [H. R. 149--Mr. Tulley's] making interest on money 6 per cent.; [H. R. l5O--Mr. Campbell's] legalizing the annexation of certain lands to the city of Logansport; [H. R. 151--Mr. Dalton's] to enable corporations of other States to hold and convey real estate lying in this State. [H. R. 152--Mr. Compton's] regulating interest on money at any rate not exceeding 6 per cent.;[H. R. 153--Mr. Stucker's] to transfer business of township assessors to the township trustees; [H. R. 154--Mr. Caldwell's] to enable owners to drain wet lands when it can not be done without affecting the lands of others, were severally read the second time and referred to appropriate committees.
And then the House adjourned.
After prayers were said by Rev. Or J. H. BAYLISS, pastor of Roberts Park M. E. Church, of this city--
Three or four dozen committee reports were submitted, and placed on the files without reading, under an order of the presiding officer of the Senate made several days ago. And then
Mr. OLDS offered the following:
Whereas, It has been charged by the public press that the Trustees of the Indiana Soldiers' Home, and the trustees and officers of the other benevolent institutions of the State, have been guilty of mismanagement and misappropriation of funds, and believing it to be the duty of the Senate to investigate the management of the benevolent institutions of the State, and to prevent, as far as in their power, all mismanagement of said institutions, and all misappropriation of moneys by the trustees and officers of the same,
Therefore, Be it Resolved, by the Senate, That a special committee of five senators be appointed by the president of the Senate to investigate the management of the Indiana Soldiers' Home, and the management of all the other benevolent and reformatory institutions, and to investigate in regard to the charges made by the public press against the trustees of the Indiana Soldiers' Home in regard to charging and receiving for their services an amount in excess of the amount to which they were entitled by law, and to further investigate and ascertain whether any trustee or officer of any of the benevolent institutions of the State have charged or received for their services any amount in excess of the amount to which they are entitled by law; and that such committee shall have power to send for and compel the attendance before them of any person to testify in relation to the matters contained in this resolution, and to compel the production or inspection of any paper or book that may be deemed necessary by them to be produced and inspected in making such investigation; that said committee make a detailed report of the result of their investigation to the Senate at as early a period as practicable.
Mr OLDS made an ineffectual demand for the previous question, which was defeated by a tie vote on a division of the Senate.
Mr. WOOLLEN offered as a substitute the following:
Whereas it has been charged in the columns of the papers in this city that the various state benevolent institutions are managed in an extravagant and corrupt manner, therefore, be it
Resolved, That a committee of three senators be appointed by the president the Senate, whose duty it shall be to investigate the management of the hospital for the insane, the institutions for the education of the deaf and dumb and blind and the soldiers' home at Knightstown, and report the results of their investigation to the Senate at least six days before the close of the regular session. And for the purpose of aiding such committee in a full investigation, they are hereby authorized to employ an expert, provided the said expert shall not be paid more than three dollars per day for the time he is actually engaged in such duty. And said committee is hereby authorized to send for persons, papers, and examine witnesses under oath.
Mr. BURRELL thought this substitute a good amendment. A special committee as provided for in the original resolution would take away several senators, while the standing committee can discharge the duty in connection with its other business.
Mr. OLDS: The substitute ought not to be adopted, because it embraces institutions under the charge of two of the standing committees of the Senate.
Mr. FOSTER preferred the substitute because it is better to employ an expert at 93 a day to do the proposed work than to send a committee of five or six members of the Senate.
Mr. HEILMAN did not believe it good policy to adopt the substitute. How can you hire a man for $3 a day who will not sell out for $5 a day to somebody else? He thought the special committee should be appointed.
Mr. WOOLLEN had greater confidence in
Mr. STREIGHT. It has not been charged that the books of these institutions have been improperly kept. What we want to know is whether extra salaries have been drawn, or whether extra charges have been made for labor or materials furnished or in the general expenditures on account of those institutions. It would take no expert to find that out.
Mr. BURRELL. The regular standing committee of the Senate should investigate whatever appears to be irregular and wrong about these institutions.
Mr. COMSTOCK favored the substitute.
Mr. FOWLER, as a usual thing, would favor the regular committees doing this kind of
work, but the substitute covers too much ground. If it is expected of the
Mr. DICE. This investigation should be made thorough and complete, and to do this we ought to have a special committee whose duty it shall be to devote its time and attention to this business until it gets at the bottom facts. As to whether it should employ an expert that question may come up hereafter and need not be decided now.
This substitute was rejected.
The original resolution was adopted.
Mr. SARNIGHOUSEN offered a resolution which was adopted, that the auditor of State be requested to inform the Senate of the amount of money drawn from the State treasury for the Normal School of Terre Haute, the State University at Bloomington, and the Purdue University at Lafayette, during the last year.
Bills for acts were introduced, read thy first time and severally referred to appropriate committees as follows:
By Mr. FOWLER, [S. 222] providing that certain misrepresentations in life or fire policies shall not affect, the policy or defeat the collection of the claim.
By Mr. WlLSON, by request,[S. 223] to extend the time for the completion of certain unfinished macadamized turn pikes or gravel roads.
By Mr. GARRIGUS, [S. 224] providing for giving notice by publication to defendants who are not residents of the State, in actions pending in the circuit courts and other inferior courts in this State, and to cure defects that are believed to exist in notices given defendants who are not residents of this State in actions that have heretofore been tried and determined in courts of this State.
By Mr. GRUBBS, [S. 222] giving Justices of the peace jurisdiction in proceedings supplementary to executions.
By Mr. FOSTER, [S. 226] amending section 159 of the general practice act of June, 1852. so that persons sending claims against laboring men for collection outside of the State by attachment or garnishment must swear that the property attached is not exempt from execution--the same as if action were brought in this State.
By Mr. WINTERBOTHAM, [S. 227] to authorise township trustees to transfer money from one special fund in their hands to another in certain cases.
By Mr. POINDEXTER, [S. 228] to suppress intemperance, panperism and crime, and providing for the recovery of damages for injuries growing out of the sale, barter or giving away of intoxicating liquors--against the party from whom the liquor came and that owner of the building having knowledge that liquor can be obtained therein.
By Mr. GRUBBS, by request, [S. 229] in relation to settlements made by county commissioners with county, township or school officers.
By Mr. VIEHE, [S. 230] enabling married women between eighteen and twenty-one years of age to convey real estate when their husbands join with them in the deed, and to legalize conveyances heretofore made in that way.
By Mr. FOWLER, [S. 231,] to amend section 1 of the act of February 7, 1855, providing that no justice shall hear or determine any State prosecution for an assault and battery, or assault unless the injured party be present or being summoned refuse to attend, or when the summons for him is returned "not found" and that no trial shall be had in cases of affray, unless a witness thereof be present and testify upon such trial, or being summoned, refuses to attend.
By Mr. MOORE,[S. 232], to amend section 8 of the act regulating and granting divorces, by striking therefrom the words "for a period of two years," so the failure of the husband to make reasonable provision for his family becomes a just cause for granting a divorce to the wife.
By Mr. BURRELL, [S. 233] to authorize county commissioners to purchase books, stationery and other articles for the several county officers for the conduct of public business; and providing how claims against counties shall be settled.
By Mr. VIEHE, [S. 234] to amend section 524 of the general practice act of June, 1852, so that in proceedings supplementary to execution, if the defendant has transferred his property to defraud creditors, the assignee or grantee of the property may be made a party and the question of fraud be tried in the proceeding.
By Mr. Harris, [S. 235] concerning payment of salaries of judges of the Superior courts--to be paid in the same manner and at the same time as salaries of judges of the Circuit courts.
By Mr. TRUSLER, by request of the Indiana State Horticulture Society, [S. 236] to amend the act for the protection of game, to-wit: It shall be unlawful in any way to kill or destroy quail for four years from the taking effect of this act. Nor pheasants from the 1st day of January to the 1st day of November in each year.
Pending the second reading of the bill, [S. 88--Mr. Comstock's]to establish a Probate Court in each county of this State.
The Senate took a recess till 2 o'clock.
The reading of bill [S. 88] was finished. A committee report thereon recommending the passage of a substitute bill--striking out from the enacting clause and inserting new matter, was also read.
The whole subject was made the special order for next Wednesday at 2 o'clock p. m., and 150 copies of the substitute ordered printed.
The bill [S. 155] [Mr. Grubb's), to prevent carrying concealed weapons, was read the second time, with a committee report recommending passage with amendments.
Mr. MENZIES thought this was taking a serious departure to allow peace officers to
Mr. GRUBBS: The trouble is with a construction of the words "on duty." Our peace officers now when they go around, do so in violation of law, even when in discharge of their duty. The exception ought to be extended to peace officers.
Mr. MENZIES: When are peace officers on duty, if not continuously? They should not have a wholesale permission to make walking arsenals of themselves. The law now keeps them somewhat in restraint, and the present law, as it is, is not strict enough. This practice of carrying concealed weapons has sent more men to the penitentiary than anything else.
The Senate refused to concur in the committee report--yeas 13, nays 30.
On motion by Mr. DICE, the bill was laid on the table.
The bill [S. 119--Mr. Kahlos] to abolish the Superior Court of Cass County, was read the second time, with amendments reported by a committee, which were concurred in, and the bill ordered engrossed for the third reading.
The bill [S. 192--Mr. Grubbs] amending sec. 468 of the general practice act was read the second time with a committee amendment, which was concurred in, and the bill ordered engrossed.
The bill [S. 58--Mr. Harris] to work prisoners in jail, was read the second time and ordered engrossed.
The bill [S. 80--Mr. Kramer's] abolishing town assessors and treasurers, was read the second time with a committee report ordering the printing of the bill, which was concurred in.
The bill [S. 101--Mr. Sarnighausen] to repeal the act authorizing formation of water-works companies, was read the second time.
Mr. SARNIGHAUSEN: It leaves with a bare majority of the council the power to authorize water-works companies.
The bill was ordered engrossed for the third reading.
The bill [S. 174--Mr.Viehe's] to provide for trial of accounts by jury or referee, was read the second time with committee amendments, which were concurred in.
Mr. VIEHE: The object is to remedy great evils now existing. The object of the bill is not to try all accounts before a referee, but only such accounts as are intricate and complicated. Manufacturers' and other difficult accounts are not proper to be tried before a jury--they can not deal out justice between man and man. The jury can not remember it all. They are frequently composed of men who do not understand bookkeeping and accounts.
Mr. COFFEY: This bill is surely in conflict with section 20 of the bill of rights, which provides that in all civil cases the right of trial by jury shall remain inviolate. This bill deprives citizens of this right.
Mr. VIEHE: The right of trial by jury did not exist when the constitution was framed, and the provision referred to only applies to the class of cases existing at the time of the adoption of the organic law. It is only by provision of the statutes that a jury in such cases can be had at all. The class of cases referred to by this bill had never been tried by jury till after that time.
Mr. OLDS: If the bill refers to civil cases, as he believes they are, then it is in conflict with the constitutional provision referred to by the senator from Brown [Mr. Coffey,] and it is wrong to deprive any citizen of the right of trial by jury. The committee's amendments to this bill were certainly not understood by senators or the report would not have been concurred in.
Mr. MENZIES favored the passage of the bill. Under the interpretation of the Supreme Court, in 27th Indiana, the General Assembly has the right to pass such a measure as this.
Mr. BURRELL urged another objection to this bill. That it permits the jury to take the papers and books to its room. The case is presented to a class of twelve judges instead of one, which will be productive of much confusion in courts of justice. When this comes under the head of class legislation.
Mr. STREIGHT favored engrossment of the bill. Business men feel the lack of fair hearing in the adjustment of intricate accounts in courts of justice where juries take such cases.
Mr. DICE: The remedy sought for in this bill is already provided for by the statute. This bill ought not to be engrossed. Who is to determine upon the qualifications of the special juries referred to in the bill? This provision would cause delay.
Mr. OLDS moved to reconsider the vote by which tho committee amendments were concurred in.
This motion was rejected on a division--affirmative 12, negative 16--and the question recurring on ordering the bill engrossed for a third reading--
Messrs. OLDS and MENZIES demanded the yeas and nays: Pending which several motions to adjourn over till Monday were rejected.
And then the Senate adjourned.
The SPEAKER called the House to order, announcing prayers by the representative from Hancock [Mr. Handy].
The journal was being read, when--
On motion of Mr. LINDLEY, the further reading was dispensed with.
The SPEAKER, then proceeded to the call by counties for the introduction of bills, resolutions, etc
The following bills were introduced, read the first time and passed to the second reading:
By Mr. COPELAND [H. R. 316] to amend an act prescribing the duties of Treasurer of state [increases his bond to $300,O00].
By Mr. K1RKPATRICK. [H. R. 317] in relation to plank, macadamized or other toll roads.
By Mr. HEROD, [H. R. 318] to amend sec. 1 of an act defining vagrancies.
By Mr. HEROD, [H. R. 319] to amend section 6 of an act concerning trusts.
By Mr. REED, [H. R. 320] to enable the board of school trustees of cities to establish schools for special purposes.
By Mr. BEARSS, [H. R. 321] to amend section 62 of the act regulating justices of the peace.
By Mr. WORKS, [H. R. 322] to amend section 40 of act fixing salaries and duties of officers named therein.
Also, [H. R. 323] concerning appropriation of money to employes of the General Assembly not fixed by law.
By Mr. EDWINS, [H. R. 324] establishing a State board of health.
By Mr. SLEETH, [H. R. 325] regulating advertizing and letting contracts for building bridges.
By Mr. HOPKINS, [H. R. 326] to repeal an act exempting certain lands in towns and cities from taxation.
By Mr. LEHMAN, [H. R. 327] prescribing
Also, [H. R. 328] to amend section 36 of an act defining misdemeanors.
Mr. HUBBARD offered a resolution, which was adopted, that inasmuch as charges had been made against trustees and officers of benevolent institutions, a special committee of five be appointed to investigate the management of all the benevolent institutions and to investigate fully the charges made against the trustees of the Orphans' Home in regard to the misappropriation of money, and ascertain whether any trustees or officers of the benevolent institutions of the State have charged or received for their services any amount to which they are entitled by law, and that such committee shall have power to send for persons and papers.
Subsequently the SPEAKER made this committee to consist of Messrs. Hubbard, Thornburg, Saint, Edwins and English.
Mr. WILLARD, [H. R. 329] to establish a state board of health.
Mr. TULLEY offered a resolution, which was adopted, that the
By Mr. ARNOLD, of Wabash, [H. R. 330] to amend section seven of an act providing for the election of supervisors of highways.
By Mr. OVERMEYER, [H. R. 331] to limit taxation of township trustees.
Mr. TAYLOR, of Daviess, from the
The report of the committee was concurred in.
The SPEAKER announced the next thing in order to be Senate bills on the second reading.
The bill [S. 4] to abolish a Superior court in "Wayne county was read the second time.
The bill [S. 80] amending the election and
qualification of justices of the peace act was read the second time, and referred to
the
The bill [S. 32] to allow the
On the motion of Mr. SLEETH the constitutional rule was suspended, and the bill [H.
R. 269] fixing the number of employes and their per diem introduced by the
Mr. HEROD moved that the bill be recommitted to a special committee of five. The yeas and nays being demanded and taken resulted--yeas 52, nays 36. So the bill was referred to special committee.
The SPEAKER made the committee to consist of Messrs. Herod, Watson, Humphrey, Stacker and Briggs.
The House then took a recess till 2 o'clock.
The SPEAKER announced the order, being bills on second reading.
The following bills were read the second time and appropriately referred, unless other- wise stated:
Mr. DONNELL'S bill, [H. R. 155] declaring that aliens shall not work a corruption of blood.
Mr. GORDON asked and obtained leave to introduce a bill [H. R. 332] for an amendment to the general practice act.
On motion by Mr. OSBORNE of Elkhart the bill [H. R. 113] to provide for the compensation of county officers was read a second time with amendments which he offered.
Mr. March's bill, [H. R. 157] to secure married women all avails of their labor. Also, his bill [H. R. 158]; settlements by county commissioners with county, township and school officers. Also, to secure homesteads to residents householders [H. R. 159].
Mr. Stevens' bill [H. R. 160] to amend the decedent's estate act.
Mr. Williard's bill, [H. R. 161] to exempt property from sale in certain cases. Also, his bill [H. R.162], labor preferred in cases of assignment.
Mr. Conoway's bill [H. R. 163] to amend the general practice act. Also, his bill [H. R. 164] to amend the general practice act.
Mr. Davidson's bill, [H. R. 165] defining conversion by attorneys, etc. Also, his bill [H. R. 169] for the protection of wild game. Also, [H. R. 167] to prevent hunting on inclosed grounds.
Mr. Humphrey's bill [H. R. 168] to authorize cities and towns to issue bonds.
Mr. Lindley's bill, [H. R. 169] concerning justices of the peace.
Mr. Handy's bill [H. R. 170] allowing parties interested to testify in their own behalf. Also [H. R. 171] interest on money. Also [H. R. 172] ineligibility of supervisors.
Mr. Hess' bill [H. R. 173] justices of the peace to certify causes to the Superior Court.
Mr. Golden's bill [H. R. 174] defining certain misdemeanors.
Mr. Saint's [H. R. 175] regulating toll. Also his bill [H. R. 176] to exempt property from sale on execution.
Mr. Copeland's bill [H. R. 177] to authorize county commissioners to borrow money.
Mr. Fancher's bill [H. R. 178] to amend the general practice act.
Mr. Connor's bill [H. R. 179] to prevent the sale of adulterated fertilizers. Also his bill [H. R. 180] to prevent destruction of baggage.
Mr. Robinson's bill [H. R. 181] concerning interest on money.
Mr. Major's bill [H. R. 182] to exempt property from sale on execution. Also his bill [H. R. 183] for licenses in certain cases.
Mr. Works' bill, [H. R. 184] who shall be competent witnesses.
Mr. Allen's bill [H. R. 185] for the assessment of property.
Mr. Blockley's bill [H. R. 186] defining the meaning of the proviso to the act.
Mr. Faulkner's bill, [H. R. 188] to regulate fire insurance companies. Also his bill [H. R. 189] to tax telegraph companies.
Mr. Vawter's bill [H. R. 190] for the relief of the Morgan raid sufferers.
Mr. Edwin's bill, [H. R. 191] County Auditors may take acknowledgments of deeds.
Mr. Shutt's bill [H. R. 192] to legalize the act of the officers of Butler, De Kalb county.
Mr. TULLEY'S bill, [H. R. 193] to enable sureties to file cross complaints.
Mr. REICHELDAFER'S bill, [H. R. 194] to prohibit the sale of intoxicating liquors.
Mr. CAMPBELL'S bill, [H. R. 195] for the relief of sureties of B. K. Peed.
Mr. COMPTON'S bill, [H. R. 196] when guardians shall report.
Mr. CALDWELL'S bill, [H. R. 197] for election and appointment of supervisors.
Mr. STUCKER'S bill, [H. R. 198] reducing the jurisdiction of the Circuit Court.
Mr. MARCH'S bill, [H. R. 199] for election and appointment of supervisors.
Mr. SHUTT'S bill, [H. R. 200] to provide for more speedy trial in certain cases.
Mr. Shutt's bill, [H. R. 201] against minors lounging around saloons.
Mr. Conway's bill, [H. R. 202] towns may enact license for the sale of liquors.
Mr. Davidson's bill, [FI.R.203] cities may construct gravel roads, etc.
Mr. Carey's bill. [H. R. 204] to punish executors, etc., for breach of trust.
Mr. Arnold of Grant's, [H. R. 205] for the election and qualification of justices of the peace. Also his bill, [H. R. 206] county commissioners to pay constables in certain cases.
Mr. Lindley's bill, [H. R. 207] prescribing the time and manner of electing super visors.
Mr. Handy's bill, [H. R. 208] to exempt $1,000
Mr. Johnson's bill, [H. R. 209] to encourage horse thief detective associations.
Mr. Kirkpatrick's bill, [H. R. 210] to regulate weights and measures.
Mr. Thayer's bill, [H. R. 211] for cancelling of judgments.
Mr. Taylor's of Lagrange bill, [H. R. 212] defining certain misdemeanors.
Mr. Edwin's bill [H. R. 213] to authorize sheriffs to administer oaths, Also his bill [H. R. 214] to regulate fare on railroads. Also his bill [H. R. 215] to prevent carrrying dead hogs through the streets.
Mr. Robinson's bill, [H. R. 216] for a homestead.
Mr. Osborne's of Elkhart bill, [H. R. 217] allowing deed, etc., when recorded admitted as evidence.
Mr. Switzer's bill, [H. R. 218] for the election of justices of the peace. Also his bill [H. R. 219] for the protection of fish.
Mr. Allen's bill, [H. R. 220] to exempt the property of married men.
Mr. Huthsieiner's bill, [H. R. 221] to regulate interest on school funds.
Mr. Seeth's bill, [H. R. 222] towns may assess and collect license for the sale of intoxicating liquors. Also his [bill, H. R. 223] for the election and appointment of supervisors.
Mr Arnold's of Wabash, bill, [H. R. 224] for an official seal for justices.
Mr. Owen's bill, [H. R. 225] to prevent the spread of Canada Thistles.
Mr. Tulley's bill, [H. R. 226] to repeal the act authorizing building and loan associations. Also his bill, [H. R. 227] to repeal the act for the protection of fish.
Mr. Dailey's bill, [H. R. 228] correcting the school account of Adams county.
Mr. Stucker's bill, [H. R. 229] in relation to guardian and ward. Also his bill, [H. R. 230] executors and administrators may sell real estate.
Mr. Shutt's bill [H. R. 231] to legalize the act of the town of Auburn. Also his bill [H. R. 232] legalizing the issuance of writs of sale in certain cases.
Mr. Flodder's bill [H. R. 233] for the election and appointment of supervisors. Also his bill [H. R. 341] for the protection of fish.
Mr Connoway's bill [H. R. 235] responsibility of married women.
Mr. HEROD by consent, introduced the bill [H. R. 333] churches may elect sexton with police powers. Also [H. R. 334] to incorporate the Phi Delta Theta Fraternity. Also [H. R. 335] for the protection of fish.
Mr. Casey's bill [H. R. 236] to prevent domestic animals from running at large.
Mr. Davidson's bill [H. R 237] to protect citizens from incompetent physicians, etc.
Mr. Snoddy's bill [H. R. 238] to amend the practice act.
Mr. Rooker's bill [H. R. 239] to legalize mortgages made to the state to secure loans from the school fund.
Mr. Wimmers' bill [H. R. 240] to prevent carrying concealed weapons. Also [H. R. 241] fixing the salary of judges of the Circuit, Superior and Criminal courts.
Mr. CARTER (by consent) introduced a bill [H. R. 236] regulating fees and salaries.
On the motion of Mr. WILLARD 200 copies were ordered printed.
Mr. Wimmer's bill [H. R. 242] fixing the Governor's salary.
Mr. Overmeyer's bil [H. R. 244] penal ordinances of incorporated towns.
Mr. Overmeyer's bill [H. R. 243] defining duties of county commissioners.
Mr. Facher's bill [H. R. 245] defining duties of incorporated towns.
Mr. Reed's bill [H. R. 246] for a commission for insane. Also his bill [H. R. 247] to legalize notary public acknowledgements after time has expired.
Mr Osborn's, of Elkhart, bill [H. R. 251] for employment for prisoners. Also his bill [H. R. 252) defining fornication. Also [H. R. 253] for official bonds. Also [H. R. 254] to prevent illegal voting.
Mr. Gordon's bill [H. R. 255] to abolish the fourth judge of the Superior court of Marion county--
Were severally read the second time and referred to appropriate committees.
The House then adjourned.
The Senate met pursuant to adjournment Wider the rules, the Lieutenant Governor, [Hon. ISAAC P. GRAY, of Randolph county,] in the chair.
Rev. Dr. J. H. BAYLISS, of the Roberts Parks Methodist church, of this city, opened the session with prayer.
The secretary's minutes of yesterday's proceedings were read, corrected and approved.
The LIEUTENANT GOVERNOR laid before the Senate the following communication from his Excellency the Governor:
BARNABAS C. HOBBS, a trustee of the Indiana State Normal school, resigned his office November 6,1877. I appointed TIMOTHY NICHOLSON to fill the vacancy, to serve as such trustee for the residue of the term ending December 20, 1879. I respectfully ask that the Senate approve and confirm that appointment.
I nominate JOHN T. SCOTT; of Vigo county, and MURRAY BRIGGS, of Sullivan county, to the office of trustee of the State Normal school aforesaid, each to serve as such trustee for the residue of the term of four years from December 20,1877, and I respectfully ask that the Senate do advise and consent their appointment by me.
The LIEUTENANT GOVERNOR also laid before the Senate the following:
SIR--The Board of State House commissioners respectfully invite all of the members of the Legislature to inspect the plans for the new State House and the specimens of stone designed for its construction sst any time that suits their convenience. The office of the board is in Fletcher & Sharpe's building, rooms 54 and 55. The commissioners will be pleased to exhibit the plans and give any information in regard to the building that may be desired.
The LIEUTENANT GOVERNOR announced the special committee authorized by a resolution adopted yesterday for investigation into the management of the benevolent institutions of the State, viz: Messrs. Olds, Woollen, Treat, Foster and Kramer.
MR. HART, by request, presented a petition from Warrick; county praying, in view of the alarming increase in the sale of intoxicating liquors, for the enactment of a local option law allowing citizens to declare by ballot whether they shall have intoxicating liquors sold in their town, township or ward,
It was referred to the
Mr. RAGAN offered the following:
Whereas, House Bill No. 1, known as the legislative appropriation bill, requires all resolutions appropriating money under its provisions to be concurrent resolutions; and,
Whereas, The Senate resolution authorizing the purchase by the State Librarian of the statutes, for the use of members of the Senate was passed prior to the passage of House Bill No. 1; and
Whereas, The Auditor of State, in compliance with the provisions of House Bill No. 1, declines to issue his warrant on the State Treasury for the purchase of the statutes by the State Librarian; therefore, be it
Resolved by the Senate, the House of Representatives concurring, that the Auditor of State be and is hereby authorized to issue bis warrant on the Treasurer of State in compliance with bill of purchase by the State Librarian, for the payment of the bill above referred to.
The resolution was adopted.
Mr. WINTERBOTHAM, from the special committee to which was referred his concurrent resolution for instruction and request of Indiana congressman to procure a modification of the patent law, which will prohibit the issue of any patent not involving new and original principles, and at the same time prevent an imposition on the public, reported the same back, with a recommendation that it do pass in the following words:
Whereas, in the execution of the patent laws of the United States their
enforcement tends to flood the country with artices of no great use or importance,
and involving no new
Be it resolved by the Senate, the House concurring, that our senators in Congress be requested and our representatives be instructed to procure such a wise and judicious modification of the patent laws, which in its operations will prohibit the issue of any patent not involving new and original principles, and at the same time prevent fraud and imposition on the people.
The report was concurred in.
Subsequently on motion by Mr. BURRELL this concurrent resolution was taken up and adopted.
Mr. DICE offered the following:
Resolved, That the Secretary of State be requested to lay on the desk of senators one copy each of the Brevier Legislative reports belonging to the State, now in the document room in the basement of the State building.
The resolution was adopted.
Mr. WOOLLEN offered the following:
Resolved, That the
Mr. WOOLLEN explained that some of his constituents desired a bill introduced for a
stay on the collection of debts where judgment has been obtained, which he thought
unconstitutional; but if the
Mr. HARRIS, believing such a measure unconstitutional, moved to lay the resolution on the table.
The motion was agreed to.
Mr. LEEPER offered the following, which was adopted:
Resolved, That the
Bills for acts were introduced, read the first time and severally referred to appropriate committees as follows:
Mr. BENZ, [S. 237] to amend section 402 of the general practice act of June 18, 1852, by striking out the non-resident clause--so every plaintiff shall file undertaking for costs in suit.
By Mr. SHIRK, [S. 238] to amend section 8 of the act of February 28, 1875, authorizing the construction of plank, M'Adamized and grave1 roads and to empower the same to make sale of a portion of their roads--so as to with hold the benefits of said act from the Central plank road company unless it passes free of toll all persons and teams connected with the public asylums of the State.
By Mr. FOWLER, [S. 239] providing for and requiring children, from eight to fourteen years of age to attend school or to be instructed at home, at least 14 weeks in each year.
By Mr. WILSON, [S. 240] to amend sect ion 2 of the act of March 5, 1877, for the protection of wild game. It shall be unlawful to net, trap or snare quails at any time, or shoot, trap or destroy quails or pheasants during the years 1879 and 1880, from December 1 to November 1, and thereafter from October 25 to December 25.
By Mr. BURRELL, [S. 241] to amend section 5 of an act of March 7, 1877, to provide for the more speedy trial of causes and facilitate the transaction of business in courts, special judge's pay to be deducted from salary of the regular judge.
By Mr. WOOLLEN,[S. 242] requiring boards of county commissioners, school trustees and township trustees to publish a statement of allowances made by them, once in every three months, in newspaper having largest circulation.
By Mr. SMITH, [S. 243] to amend sections 2 and 4 of act supplementary and amendatory of the property assessment and taxation law approved March 8, 1873, so taxes on tax duplicate may be paid in full before the third Monday in July, or one half before the first Monday in January following.
By Mr. FOWLER, [S. 244] declaring the title to real estate in the vendee where, at the time of conveyance, the vendor had no title, but who afterwards acquired title to real estate so conveyed.
By Mr. HART, by request, to provide that the mortgageor of real estate or any other grantee, holder or owner of such mortgaged property shall not be liable on execution for any deficiency in case the mortgaged property does not sell for a sufficient amount to pay the principal, interest and costs; and that a return of execution showing sale of such mortgaged premises shall be a release of any further liability on account of such debt, judgment and execution.
By Mr. BURRELL, by request, [S. 246] to provide for the appointment [by the governor] of a board of railroad commissioner, [three] and to define their powers, duties, and fixing their compensation.
Pending the introduction of bills, Mr. Menzies offered the following:
Resolved, That hereafter the reading clerk of the Senate in reading bills, resolutions, reports and any other matter pertaining to business before the Senate, shall occupy a position in front of the reporter's desk.
The resolution was adopted.
On motion by Mr. VIEHE, 200 copies of his bill. [S. 174] for trial of accounts by jury or referee, with the committee's report thereon, were ordered printed.
On motion by Mr. KRAMER, his bill [S. 80] to abolish the office of assessor and treasurer in cities and towns, was made the special; order for next Wednesday afternoon at 2 o'clock.
The Senate then adjourned till Monday morning at 10 o'clock.
The SPEAKER called the House to order, and Representative MAJOR, of Morgan. County opened the session with prayer.
The reading of the journal of yesterday was ordered.
The clerk proceeded to read, when--
On the motion of Mr. GAROUTTE the further reading was dispensed with
The SPEAKER announced the order of business--the reading of bills the second time.
The following bills were read the second time and referred to appropriate committees, unless otherwise stated:
Mr. Schwitzer's bill [H. R. 248] to amend section 172 of an act to provide for the uniform assessment of taxes.
Mr. COMPTON asked and obtained leave to introduce a bill [H. R. 337] for the collection of delinquent taxes.
Also a bill [H. R. 338] for the distribution of road tax.
Mr. CONNER asked and obtained leave to introduce a bill [H. R. 339] to prohibit the killing of quails for three years.
Mr. Schwitzer's bill, [H. R. 249] in relation to prosecuting attorneys and prescribing mode of bringing witnesses before courts of justice, and their examination in reference to felonies, etc.
Mr. Schwitzer's bill [H. R. 250] requiring parents and guardians to send children to school.
Mr. Huthsteiner's bill [H. R. 256] to reduce the rate of interest on county orders when not paid for want of funds.
Mr. Blockley's bill [H. R. 257] to regulate work on roads.
Mr. Sleeth's bill [H. R. 258] to repeal section 16 and amend section one of an act concerning voluntary assignments.
Mr. Saint's bill [H. R. 259] to prohibit the use of free passes.
Mr. Vanpelt's bill [H. R. 261] in relation to hedges along highways.
Mr Perry's bill [H. R. 262]; county printing, including delinquent tax list, must be let to the lowest bidder.
Mr. Perry's bill [H. R. 263] for the protection of fish.
Mr. Ginz's bill [H. R. 264] to secure laboring men in cases of assignment.
Mr. Kester's bill [H. R. 265] for a revision of the road law.
Mr. Taylor's, of Warrick, bill [H. R. 266] to prevent mortgaged property from being run off.
Mr. Taylor's bill [H. R. 267] to repeal the act authorizing towns and townships to aid in the construction of railroads.
Mr. Taylor's bill [H. R. 268] defining libel.
Mr. Dailey's bill [H. R. 270] for the protection of the ballot box.
Mr. Compton's bill [H. R. 271] authorizing street car companies to use streets, highways,etc.
Mr. Donnell's bill [H. R. 272] to limit prosecutions under State and city laws.
Mr March's bill [H. R. 273] prescribing forms of deeds for sheriffs or coroners.
Mr. March's bill [H. R. 274] to amend section one of an act to limit the number of grand jurors.
Mr. Willard's bill, [H. R. 275] to prevent fishing in ponds on enclosed lands.
Mr. Connoway's bill, [H. R. 276] to create the circuit and for dividing the State into judicial circuits.
Mr. Davidson's bill, [H. R. 277] to amend an act providing for a general system of common schools.
Mr. Humphrey's bill, [H. R. 278] to exempt $500 worth of property from sale on execution.
Mr Kirkpatrick's bill, [H. R. 279] providing for giving notice to non-residents.
Mr. Rooker's bill, [H. R. 280] fixing the grade on gravel or macadamized roads.
Mr. Wimmer's bill, [H. R. 281] to amend section 2 of an act for a geological survey and a State geologist.
Mr. Wimmer's bill [H. R. 282] regulating the salary of superintendent of public instruction.
Mr. Wimmer's bill [H. R. 283] to amend sec. 1 of an act relating to salaries of public officers.
Mr. Brown's bill [H. R. 284] to enable owners of lands to clean out ditches where the same can not be done without injury to adjoining lands.
Mr. HUMPHREYS asked and obtained leave to introduce a bill [H. R. 340] for the apportionment of the State for senatorial and representative purposes.
On motion two hundred copies were ordered printed
Mr. Golden's bill [H. R. 285] defining libel.
Mr. Golden's bill [H. R. 286] prescribing the duty of coroners.
Mr. Copland's bill [H. R. 287] to abridge the duties of county superintendent.
Mr. Copeland's bill [H. R. 288] to regulate freights on railroads.
Mr. Dalton's bill [H. R. 289] for the election of justices of the peace.
Mr. Dalton's bill [H. R. 290] regulating the running at large of domestic animals
Mr. Taylor's of Lagrange, bill [H. R. 291] to amend section 17 of an act to provide for a general system of common schools.
Mr. Taylor's bill [H. R. 292] to amend section 3 of an act to provide for a general system of common schools.
Mr. Taylor's bill [H. R. 293] defining certain felonies.
Mr. Edwin's bill [H. R. 294] to provide dead bodies for medical colleges, and to prevent grave robbing.
Mr. English's bill [H. R. 295] for a metropolitan police.
Mr. Connor's bill [H. R. 296] to fix the fare in sleeping cars.
Mr. Gordon's bill [H. R. 297] to regulate the practice of medicine.
Mr. Gordon's bill [H. R. 298] to amend the act authorizing the erection of a new State House.
Mr. Robinson's bill [H. R. 299] to prevent persons who are mortgagors of goods and chattels from running off or hiding the same.
Mr. Mier's bill [H. R. 302] to allow street railway companies to run dummies.
Mr. Rodman's bill [H. R. 303] to exempt $1,000 worth of property from execution.
Mr. Huthsteiner's bill [H. R. 303] authorizing towns to pay salaries to librarians.
Mr. Kelley's bill,[H. R. 304] to amend sec. 3 of an act to regulate the sale of intoxicating liquors.
Mr. Huthsteiner's bill [H. R. 303] to legalize the Town of Tell City in Perry county.
Mr. Kelley's bill [H. R. 305] to prevent false and fictitious signatures to remonstrances against liquor license.
Mr. Sleeth's bill [H. R. 306] requiring trustees of express trusts to record deeds where the largest amount nf property lies.
Mr. Sleeth's bill [H. R. 307] to divide the state for judicial purposes.
Mr. Briggs' bill [H. R. 308] to amend section one of an act--agreements to pay attorney fees in any evidence of indebtedness illegal.
Mr. Osborne's bill [H. R. 309] for the partition of real estate.
Mr. Arnold's bill [H. R. 310] authorizing sheriffs and constables to follow defendant into adjoining counties.
Mr. Harlan's bill [H. R. 311] to punish tramps.
Mr. Mitchell's bill [H. R. 312] to authorize a seal for the adjutant general.
Mr. Mitchell's bill. [H. R. 313] for the listing of personal property.
Mr. Hart's bill [H. R. 314] to amend section 10 of the common school law and declaring the manner in which trustees shall employ school teachers
Mr. Saint's bill [H. R. 315] for a majority to sign petition for a license to sell liquor in town or ward where sold.
Mr. Copeland's bill [H. R. 316] to amend an act prescribing the duties of Treasurer of State, and to his increase his bond to $300,000.
Mr. Kirkpatrick's bill [H. R. 317] in relation to plank, macadamized and other toll roads.
Mr. Herod's bill [H. R. 318] to amend section one of an act defining vagrancies.
Mr. Herod's bill [H. R. 319] to amend section 8 of an act concerning trusts.
Mr. Reed's bill [H. R. 320] to enable the board of school trustees of cities to establish schools for special purposes.
Mr. Bearss' bill [H. R. 321] to amend section 52 of an act regulating justices of the peace.
Mr. Works' bill [H. R. 322] to amend section 40 of an act fixing salaries and duties of officers therein named.
Mr. Works' bill [H. R. 323] concerning appropriation of money to employes of the General Assembly not fixed by law.
Mr. Edwin's bill [H. R. 324] establishing a State board of health.
Mr. Seeth's bill [H. R. 325] regulating the letting of contracts for building bridges.
Mr. Hopkin's bill [H. R. 326] to repeal an act exempting certain lands in towns and cities from taxation.
Mr. Lehman's bill [H. R. 327] prescribing duties of supervisor and circuit court clerks.
Mr. Lehman's bill [H. R. 328] to amend section 36 of an act defining misdemeanors.
Mr Willard's bill [H. R. 329] to establish a State board of health.
Mr Arnold's, of Wabash, bill [H. R. 330] to amend section seven of an act providing for the election and appointment of supervisors of highways.
Mr. Overmeyer's bill [H. R. 331] to limit taxation by township trustees.
Mr. Herod's bill [H. R. 333] giving the powers of policemen to sextons of churches when duly elected.
Mr. Gordon's bill, [H. R. 332] for an amendment to the general practice act of June 18, 1852.
Mr. Herod's bill, [H. R. 334] to incorporate the Phi Delta Theta fraternity.
Mr. Herod's bill, [H. R. 335] for the protection of fish.
Mr. Carter's bill, [H. R. 336] regulating fees and salaries.
Were severally read the second time and referred to appropriate committees.
The SPEAKER then declared the calendar exhausted.
Mr. STUCKER asked and obtained leave to introduce a bill [H. R. 341] for an act regulating the conduct of business in Circuit courts and fixing the time for the summons of petit jurors.
Mr. STUCKER also introduced a bill [H. R. 342] authorizing county commissioners to contract for all printing and supplies necessary for he county offices.
And then on motion the House adjourned. until Monday at 2 o'clock p. m.
The session was opened with prayer by Rev. A. Bessonies, of St. John's Catholic church.
On motion by Mr. HARRIS the readier of Saturday's minutes were dispensed with.
Mr. SARNIGHAUSEN, from the special committee to which was referred a special message from his excellency, the governor, recommending the sale of University park in the city of Indianapolis, being the square bounded by Meridian, New Yorks, Pennsylvania and Vermont streets, and appropriating the proceeds thereof to the support of the Indiana State University, in lieu of the usual appropriation from the general state treasury, reported as the opinion of the committee, that at the present time it is inexpedient either to sell or authorize the sale of said parcel of ground.
On motion by Mr. SARNIGHAUSEN the report was concurred in.
Several reports from committees returning Senate bills were submitted and placed on the files without reading.
Mr. F0STER offered the following:
Resolved, That a committee of three senators be appointed by the president of the Senate instanter, whose duty it shall be to repair immediately to the office of the Journal Printing company, in this city, to ascertain the amount of printing done by order of the Senate the present session, and the cost thereof, and report the same to this body as soon as such information can be obtained.
Mr. HARRIS desired the author to explain the intent of the resolution. This printing is being done by the Journal company under a contract with the printing bureau.
Mr. FOSTER was satisfied the Senate was having entirely too much printing done, and that when senators were informed of the amount of printing ordered and its cost they will be astonished. There can certainly be nothing wrong in ascertaining the amount of work ordered and the probable cost, and having it brought to the attention of the Senate.
The resolution was adopted.
Subsequently the LIEUTENANT GOVERNOR made the committee to consist of Messrs. Foster, Woollen and Dice.
Bills for acts were introduced, read the first time and severally referred to appropriate committees, unless otherwise stated, as follows:
By Mr. FOWLER, [S. 247] to divide the State into congressional districts.
By Mr. SHIRK, [S. 248] to secure homesteads to resident householders--not to exceed 80 acres in the country or half an acre in town, with improvements not to exceed in value $2,500.
By Mr. SARNIGHAUSEN, [S. 249] to amend section 1 of the act of March 13, '77, exempting certain lands from taxation for city and town purposes.
By Mr. WINTERBOTHAM, [S. 250] to fix the number of senators and representatives to the General Assembly, and apportion the same among the several counties of the State.
By Mr. DAVENPORT, [S. 251] amending sections 3, 4, 7,10,11 and ]4 of the act of March 12, 1875, establishing city courts in cities of 6,000 inhabitants and over, and defining jurisdiction.
By Mr. TRAYLOR [S. 252] to amend section 2 of the misdemeanor or provoke act of December 2,1865, so as to strike therefrom the word "attempt."
By Mr. LEEPER,[S. 253] defining the manner in which certain lands and property in cities and towns may be taxed for corporation purposes. Plats used for agricultural purposes shall not be taxed for city or town purposes a greater per cent. than in the civil township.
By Mr. VIEHE, [S. 254] to provide for the payment of judges holding courts out of their circuits--authorizing payment from the salary of the regular judge.
By Mr. BRISCOE, [S. 255] prescribing certain duties of owners of lands, and other matters connected therewith.
By Mr. FOWLER, [S. 256] to amend section 6 of the general practice act of June 18, 1852.
By Mr. LEEPER, [S. 257] empowering boards of county commissioners to render judgment for costs and enforce collection of costs by execution.
By Mr. SARNIGHAUSEN, [S. 258] to legalize the action of local authorities in the annexation of certain territory to the city of Fort Wayne.
By Mr. WILSON, [S. 259] to fix the salary of the judges of the supreme court at $3,000, circuit $2,000, superior $2,000 and criminal $1,000; the latter in cities of 50,000 inhabitants or over $1,500 ; superior and criminal salaries to be paid out of the county treasuries in which they are located.
By Mr. BURRELL, [S.260] to amend sections 39 and 43 of the common school amendatory act of March 2, 1877, by striking out the visiting power of the superintendent.
By Mr. WILSON [S. 261] to amend section 2 of the act of May 31, l852. in relation to county auditors.
By Mr. BRISCOE, [S. 262] to repeal section 2 of the supervision of highways act of March 5, 1877.
By Mr. FOWLER, [S. 263] defining libel.
By Mr. Burrell, [S. 264] for the making and preservation of the record of claims presented to and passed upon by the General Assembly. The constitutional restriction was dispensed with, the bill read the second time and referred to the committee on organization of courts.
By Mr. LEEPER, [S. 265] to provide for the appointment of receivers in certain cases--supplementary to execution the judge may appoint.
By Mr. WILSON,[S. 266] relative to the salary of the superintendent of public instruction shall be $1,000.
By Mr. OLDS, [S. 267] to amend section 1 of the act of March, 14, 1867, amendatory of section 561 of the general practice act of June 18, 1852.
The LIEUTENANT-GOVERNOR again laid before the Senate the communication from the governor, printed in these reports Saturday, nominating as trustees of the State normal school, Timothy Nicholson, till December 20, 1879; John T. Scott of Vigo, and Murray Briggs of Sullivan, till December 20,1881; and,
On motion of Mr. SARNIGHAUSEN, these nominations were confirmed by the Senate.
The bill, [S. 163--Mr. Ragan's] election inspectors shall be appointed from the party in the majority at the last previous election for secretary of state, was read the second time and ordered engrossed for the third reading.
The bill, [S. 45--Mr. Peterson's] allowing township trustees to levy a tax for a fund that has been used for another, was read the third time with a committee report recommending indefinite postponement.
Mr. KENT moved to refer it to the
Pending which came the recess till 2 o'clock.
The Senate bills, on the subject of interest. were returned from the
The Senate returned to the consideration of the bill [S. 45] pending at the time of the noon recess.
Mr. HARRIS thought the bill goes too far in providing that the sureties may be released from their bond. This bill only applies to cases where confusion already exists--it is retrospective, and not prospective. Some remedy of this kind ought to be adopted, and the purport of this bill is right. The safest course usually is to follow the recommendations of committees, but in this case, possibly the provisions of the bill were not properly understood by the committee which considered it.
Mr. TRUSLER favored the adoption of the committee report, and approved the pending motion [Mr. Kent's ] The township trustee has now too much power, and this bill, for a special act, goes too far--one should look well to the future in the making of laws, and be exceedingly careful how powers are extended in any direction.
Mr. BURRELL: When we come to legalizing acts the Supreme court has decided are not legal, we are resolving ourselves into a court; and that is what this bill proposes to do. Whenever the trustee converts the school fund in any other direction, he should suffer for that illegal act by which he wrongs the tax-payer. When a levy is made according to law, the tax-payer should rest assured that the fund will not be converted, and then the Legislature steps in and legalizes the unlawful act of the trustee.
Mr. DICE: This is not a bill to enlarge the powers of the school trustees. It is a bill to legalize what trustees in townships all over the State have been doing, and no harm has come of it except in this case in Montgomery county, which this bill would relieve. It is a hardship to that trustee, and the bill, while relieving that man, would work a hardship to no one. This case appeals to the equity of every man.
Mr. SHAFFER could see no injustice in voting for a recommitment of this bill, which Is only intended to meet the one particular case referred to, or to similar ones. And the only remedy is in the passage of such a bill by the General Assembly. The courts can not do that trustee justice, because they have to decide according to law; and, while it is admitted that he acted illegally, yet by passing this relief for him no one can be wronged.
Mr. COMSTOCK doubted not but that this bill has been carefully considered by the committee recommending its indefinite postponement. It may be true, in this instance, no great harm may be done by the passage of the fill, but it would be setting a very dangerous precedent, and might lead many a one hereafter to act unlawfully, in the hope that this precedent would be followed and he be relieved from harm.
Mr. FOWLER believed there are some merits in this bill, and thought it ought to be recommitted. If there is any really good thing in this bill it ought not to fail.
Mr. GARRIGUS also believed there are merits in this bill. Many of the 1,000 trustees in the State can not be supposed to know the volumes of law enacted for their government. They act more on the principle of strict equity, where there are doubtful provisions in the statute. It is a common custom for them to overdraw from certain friends till another levy and collection was made, and Boards of commissioners have advised and consented to such acts. This bill ought to be recommitted for more careful consideration.
Mr. OLDS: If this bill is proper, pass it; if not, concur in the report of the committee. Every citizen should obey the laws. It would be strange, indeed, if trespassers of the law should all come up to the Legislature for relief from their violation of the law. There is no good reason why officers should not comply with the laws as well as every other citizen. Officers should not go forward in vio1ation of law, and then hope some future Legislature will legalize their illegal acts. It is setting a bad precedent--saying to these officers in effect," you can act according to your own discretion."
The motion to recommit was agreed, to by yeas 28, nays 15.
The bill [S. 71-Mr. Leeper's] authorizing justices to require additional replevin bail where insufficient, was read a second time, with a committe report recommending passage. The report was concurred in and the bill ordered engrossed for a third riding.
The bill [S. l05--Mr. Fowler's] requiring vendors who desire to retain a lien on real estate to take a mortgage, was read a second time, with a committee report recommending indefinite postponement.
Mr. FOWLER did not believe the committee report should be concurred in. Vendor's liens should be abolished, and those desiring to retain a lien should do so by mortgages, and these mortgages should be recorded as others are. The almost absolute necessity of this bill is known to every lawyer. He hoped the report of the committee would be rejected.
Mr. LANGDON favored concurrence in the report. This is a proposition to legislate upon a subject now well understood.
On motion by Mr. VIEHE, the bill and report was referred to the
The bill [S. 117--Mr. Briscoe's] to abolish the criminal court of Allen county,
was read the second time with a committee report recommending indefinite postponement.
On his motion, it was referred to the
Mr. FOSTER, from the special committee appointed this morning to ascertain the cost of printing already ordered by the Senate, reported that 17 bills have been printed at a cost of $92.50; the cost of printing 200 copies of the rules of the Senate and 175 copies of the calendar is $75.16, making the total cost of printing $167.96. He thought it unnecessary to enter into any discussion of this subject, for every senator could see an unnecessary amount of printing is being done under the resolution adopted four or five days ago. Already ninety odd dollars have been expended in printing bill alone. He would like to have the resolution authorizing the printing of bills reconsidered.
Mr. HARRIS objected to interference with the regular order. He moved the report be received and the committee discharged.
The motion was agreed to.
The bill [S. 124--Mr. Smith's] defining jurisdiction of justices and mayors was read the second time with a committee report recommending its indefinite postponement.
Mr. SMITH: Now our circuit courts have jurisdiction of small cases and the object of the bill is to give justices and mayors of towns and cities exclusive jurisdiction of trivial cases. It would save a large expense to the State and much time to the people, who could then attend the trials of small cases in their own townships. There never was a litigant who carried a very small case to the circuit court without involving both parties in greater expense than the amount first sued for. This measure is greatly desired by his constituency.
Mr. VIEHE: The committee take a different view. Trials before Justices generally result in two trials, and instead of saving expenses it piles it up greater than if the suit was commenced in the Circuit Court. If these cases are confined to Justices of the Peace it will be a Virtual denial of Justice in many instances.
Mr. STREIGHT hoped the bill would be recommitted for more careful consideration. There is as much substantial justice obtained before Justices of the Peace as anywhere. If Justices are given exclusive jurisdiction in little cases, you will get rid of much expense. He moved the recommittal of the bill.
Mr. GRUBBS thought it useless to recommit without instructions, because the committee would make the sane report they made before.
Mr. HARRIS thought this bill need not be referred to any committee. Those in favor of enlarging powers of justices should vote for this bill.
Mr. STREIGHT changed his motion so as to refer the bill to the
Mr. BURRELL thought the bill ought to be indefinitely postponed, and opposed the motion to refer.
Mr. FOWLER made an ineffectual motion- yeas, 18; nays, 22--to lay on the table the motion to refer.
The motion (Mr. Streight's) was then agreed to.
The bill [S. 138] relating to Congressional and township school funds; the loan of fractional sums thereof by combining into a "miscellaneous fund," and requiring full distribution of all funds required to be on hand by law, was read the second time with a committee report recommending its passage.
Mr. HARRIS: A similar bill was passed the Senate two years ago, prepared by the Senator from Marshal, [Mr. Reeve] at the instance of the superintendent of public instruction, but failed to become a law for want of time to pass the other branch of the General Assembly. The purpose of the bill is to keep the little dribs of money at work, earning interest for the people.
The committee report was concurred in, and the bill ordered engrossed for the third reading.
The bill [S. 151, Mr. Trusler's] increasing the pay of supervisor of highways to
$1.25 a day and removing the freehold qualification clause, was read the second time
with a committee report recommending its reference to the
The report was concurred in.
The bill [S. 156--Mr. Ragan's,] allowing trustees to levy a tax to pay his fees and office expenses, was read the second time, with a committee report for indefinite postponement.
The report was concurred in.
The bill [S. 158--Mr. Harris'] removing legal disabilities from married women, was read the second time, with a majority of the committee report recommending its passage and a minority reporting adversely.
On motion, it was made the special order for Friday next at 2 o'clock p. m., and 200 copies ordered printed.
And then the Senate adjourned.
The SPEAKER called the House to order, the representative from Hancock county [Mr. HANDY] opening the afternoon session with prayer.
The SPEAKER ordered the clerk to read the journal of Saturday's proceedings.
The clerk proceed to read until--
On the motion of Mr. Gordon the further reading was dispensed with.
The SPEAKER then proceeded with the call by counties for the introduction of bills, resolutions, etc.
The following described bills were introduced, read the first time and passed to the second reading:
By Mr. SHUTT, [H. R. 343] to more eventually provide for the listing for taxation of all personal property. etc.
By Mr. WILLARD, [H. R. 344] for an act fixing the fees and salaries and describing the duties o' county officers.
Mr. WILLARD said that this bill was suggested and drawn up on the decision of the
courts in the case of Hamlin vs. the Board of Commissioners of Floyd county. It graded
On his motion 200 copies were ordered printed.
By Mr. BROWN of Jasper, [H. R. 315] to amend section 22 of an act for the incorporation of towns.
By Mr. LEHMAN, [H. R. 346] authorizing the sale of certain real estate belonging to the State of Indiana.
By Mr. GORDON [H. R. 347] defining defamation.
By Mr. GORDON, [H. R. 348] supplemental to the general practice act.
By Mr. GORDON, [H. R. 349] supplemental to the act of defining felony.
By Mr. GORDON, [H. R. 350] to appeal certain acts named to abolish the Sixth Judicial circuit and the Marion County Criminal court.
By Mr. HEROD, [H. R. 351] to authorize justices to appoint persons to act in their stead in certain cases.
By Mr. ROBINSON [H. R. 352] to provide for the relief of mortgagors in certain cases.
By Mr. KELLY, [H. R. 353] defining what shall constitute a newspaper--legalizing patent outsides.
On the motion of Mr. KELLY, his resolution in relation to John T. Campbell's
copyright on roads was taken from the table and referred to the
By Mr. WATSON, [H. R. 334] to amend section 204 of an act to provide for a uniform assessment of property, and for the collection and return of taxes.
By Mr. SLEETH, [H. R. 355] defining verbal slander.
By Mr. VANPELT [H. R. 356] to amend sec. 46 of an act providing for the election and qualification of justice of the peace.
By Mr. GAROUTTE, [H. R. 357] to amend section 7 of the common school law. The school trustees shall receive the special school revenue belonging thereto and the revenue for tuition, which may be appropriated to the township, town or city by the State for tuition; shall state the amount of special school revenue for tuition on hand at the commencement of the year.
By Mr. TAYLOR of Warrick, [H. R. 358] for an act relating to tramps.
By Mr. CAMPBELL, [H. R. 359] for an act defining tippling houses.
By Mr. SCHWITZER, [H. R. 360] to amend section 1 of an act regulating complaints in bastardy.
By Mr. SCHWITZER, [H. R. 361] to repeal the act to provide for a general system of common schools.
By Mr. SCHWITZER, [H. R. 362] to amend sections 9 and 14 of the act for the sale of intoxicating liquors.
By Mr. SCHWITZER, [H. R. 363] to regulate the practice of dentistry.
The SPEAKER laid before the House a communication from the auditor of state, which was read, in answer to a resolution of the House requesting a report of the amount of taxes collected under section six of the act approved March 3, 1873, stating that from the time the law went into effect to the present time, there has been paid into the State treasury $1,308 25; that the enforcement of the law had been resisted in the courts as unconstitutional, and so far the question has not been determined, and that the attorneys for the State will appear before the proper committees and give any information required.
The following bills were read the second time and referred to appropriate committees, unless otherwise stated:
Mr. Saint's bill [H. R. 335] to amend sections 3, 4,13 and 16 of the liquor law, so as to require a petition, signed by a majority o male citizens and voters of the ward or precinct, before license shall be granted.
Mr. Compton's bill. [H. R. 337] for an act to provide for delinquent tax? s
Mr. Compton's bill, [H. R. 338] for the distribution of the road tax.
A message from the Senate was read by the secretary thereof, announcing that the
president of the Senate had signed enrolled Senate bill No. 32, allowing the
Also, that the Senate had passed Senate joint resolution No. 4, in regard to the patent laws.
Mr. Conner's bill [H. R. 339] to prohibit the taking or killing of quails for three years.
Mr. Humphrey's bill [H. R. 340] for the apportionment of the State for senatorial and representative purposes.
Mr. Stucker's bill [H. R. 341] for an act regulating the conduct of business in Circuit Courts, and fixing the time for summons of petit jurors.
The SPEAKER then said that he had signed enrolled Senate, bill No. 32, and that the same would be transmitted to the Governor for his signature, and that the business on the speaker table was exhausted.
And then on motion the House adjourned.
The session was opened with prayer by Rev. Mr. TEVIS, of the Methodist church, of this city.
Petitions were presented from the counties of Johnson and Marshall for a local option license law, and for a constitutional amendment prohibiting the sale and manufacture of intoxicating liquors as a beverage.
Dozens of bills were returned by the several standing committees with reports thereon, which were placed on the files without reading,
Mr. MENZIES offered the following:
Whereas, The public burdens have become so onerous that, retrenchment and economy are necessary in every branch of the public service; and,
Whereas, the belief is widespread in this State that the expense of education is too great, and that the public schools and the revenue set apart and created for their support are being managed and operated in conflict with the constitution of the State, and at variance with the wishes of the people, and that great abuses have grown and become a part of our system of education; and,
Whereas, Expending public revenue for establishing and maintaining what are known as "high schools," and the further maintaining of colleges and universities, is a violation of the constitution; and,
Whereas, The present laws of this State foster the abuses aforesaid, and have been interpreted and executed to that end; therefore, be it
Resolved, That every effort should be made to keep taxation for common school purposes, and the use of the common school fund of the State, within the limits defined by the letter and spirit of the constitution of the State.
Resolved, That the committee on education be and are hereby instructed to report, at their earliest convenience, a bill revising our school laws, prohibiting the expenditure of school funds and revenue for any other than common schools; prohibiting frequent changes in text books; putting a limit to and a check upon the extravagance of township trustees and school boards in erecting costly school houses, and filling them frequently with expensive and unnecessary furniture, and repealing all law by which any college or university within this State draws money from the public treasury.
Mr. SARNIGHAUSEN offered the following as supplementary to the above:
Resolved, That the State superintendent of public instruction is hereby requested to furnish at his earliest convenience, to the Senate, a statement as to what extent the local school levies, now authorized by law, can be reduced without injury to the public schools of the State.
Mr. MENZIES: Only 3 or 4 in the high schools, out of classes of 50 or 60, usually graduate, and they generally all apply for teachers' license; in other words, the State is called upon to keep up schools for the manufacture of teachers. The State might as well educate lawyers, doctors, or blacksmiths. At the Purdue University they educate pupils to be farmers--to learn how to plough, and raise shanghai chickens. Are we to misappropriate funds of the people in this way? Let us meet these evils bodily and not shirk the issue.
Mr. WOOD: If the resolution means to reduce a just and necessary expenditure, he should oppose it, as a friend to education. So much under our theory of government depends upon education--our government could not exist one day but for a good system of education--is it not just to qualify people in this State to teach the common schools?
Mr. LANGDON was glad to see the gentlemen take so lively an interest in this old question; they will have abundant opportunity before the close of the session to ventiliate the question of appropriating money to the cause of higher education, and we can settle it without frittering away the morning hour on a resolution like this.
Mr. SARNIGHAUSEN assured senators this resolution shall not die in the committee room, and that it shall receive the most careful consideration at the hands of the committee.
Mr. DICE insisted this resolution should be
Mr. REEVE: The
Mr. WINTERBOTHAM knew that every year for many sessions these higher institutions of learning come in here asking for appropriations for the education of a privileged few. In one of the high schools, to his knowledge, $900 a year is paid to a fiddler.
Mr. STREIGHT favored the State giving the best possible education to the whole people, but it is improper to do for the few what can not be done for the many. The State can not give a college education to all, therefore he favored the principle embodied in the resolution. He hoped the committee would not throw it aside as impracticable, but give to it careful consideration.
On motion of Mr. LANGDON, the resolutions were referred to the
Mr. FOSTER made an ineffectual motion--yeas 31, nays 14--to reconsider the vote adopting the resolution authorizing the printing of all bills which are reported from standing committees with such recommendation.
Mr. TAYLOR offered a resolution for instruction and request of Indiana congressmen to procure the enactment of a law making greenbacks subject to taxation.
It was referred to the
Bills for acts were introduced, read the first time, and severally referred to appropriate committees, as follows:
By Mr KRAMER, [S. 268] to fix court terms in the Second judicial circuit.
By Mr. REEVE, [S. 269] to prohibit the leasing or renting of dwellings or tenant houses, to be occupied by prostitutes or gamblers.
By Mr. STREIGHT, [S. 270] to reduce the number of superior judges in Marion county to three.
By Mr. COMSTOCK, [S. 271] enlarging the jurisdiction of mayors and justices.
By Mr. LEEPER, [S. 272] placing companies organized for manufacturing, mining, printing, etc., on the same footing as to taxation with private individuals.
By Mr. LANGDON, [S. 273] relating to influencing jurors and supplemental to the act of June 14, l852, defining felonies.
By Mr. RAGAN, [S. 274] for the relief of Thomas N. Jones, of Hendricks county, from a judgment taken against him on the official bond of L. S. Shuler, late warden of the Southern Penitentiary.
By Mr. REEVE, [S. 275] to secure more perfect legislation and facilitate the passage and perfection of laws--creating a board of five attorneys, appointed by the governor, to be known as the "Legislative Commission," whose duty it shall be to examine and put in proper shape every bill submitted to it by members of the General Assembly.
By Mr. MENZIES [S. 276] regulating submission to the supreme court whenever the issues are complete by joinder in error, and where error is joined after filing the record of the cause in such court.
And then came the recess till 2 o'clock p. m.
The LIEUTENANT GOVERNOR laid before the Senate the first official communication from the secretary of State since assuming the duties of his position, as follows:
SIR--In response to the resolution of the Senate requesting the secretary of State to lay on the desk of senators one copy each of the Brevier reports. I beg to say that such reports were duly delivered on Monday last.
On motion by Mr. VIEHE, the bill reported yesterday by the
By Mr. REEVE, [S. 278] providing who may practice medicine and surgery and carry on the business of apothecary and pharmaceutist.
By Mr. WILSON, by request, [S. 279] legalizing acts of Notaries Public done after the expiration of their commissions.
By Mr. COMSTOCK, [S. 280] supplementary to the act to establish public libraries, of February 16, 1852, defining the powers and duties of Township Trustees in relation to libraries established for the use and benefit of all the inhabitants of the Township by private donation.
By Mr. FOWLER, [S. 281] making the legal rate of interest six per cent.
By Mr. BENZ, [S. 282] to repeal sections 1, 2 and 3 of the act of March 13, 1875, supplemental to the assessments of property.
By Mr. WOOD, [S. 285] to declare one-half of all fines imposed in any county of this State for violation of the criminal laws for the use and work of the public highways, etc.
By Mr. REEVE, [S. 286] in relation to voting in case of levy of special taxes or assessments by towns, cities and such other authority as may be authorized by law to levy and collect special taxes or assessments; declaring who may and who may not vote in any proceeding in the nature of a decision by ballot, etc., and other matters properly connected with the subject matter.
By Mr. URMSTON, [S. 287] to amend section 1, of an act of February 19, 1857, authorizing the appointment of special administration.
By Mr. VIEHE: [S. 288] by request, to amend section 56,78 and 354 of the general practice act of June 18, 1852.
By Mr. REEVE, [S. 289] defining vagrancy, authorizing the arrest of vagrants, and requiring them to labor, and prescribing penalties for vagrancy, etc., for restraining and controlling vagrants, prescribing duties and liabilities of railroad companies, etc.
By Mr. REEVE, [S. 290] creating a Bureau of Labor statistics, the appointment of a commission and appropriating money for carrying on the same. The Governor to appoint a commissioner who shall name his assistant.
By Mr. REEVE, [S. 291] relating to the em-[ployment]
By Mr. REEVE, [S. 292] to preserve documentary evidence on file in the courts of this State; prohibiting the entry of judgments and other evidence of debt until the original shall be filed and endorsed.
By Mr. TAYLOR, [S. 293] to amend sec 19 of the act of May 29, 1852, prescribing the power of justices in State prosecutions.
By Mr. WILSON, [S. 291] to encourage the killing of chicken hawks.
The bill [S. 15--Mr. Comstock's] regulating the numbers and qualifications of petit jurors, was indefinitely postponed.
The bill [S. 26--Mr. Wood's] declaring swamp land patents and records thereof, evidence, coming up with a committee report recommending indefinite postponement--
Mr. WOOD gave reasons why such a measure should become a law.
The report was rejected, and on his motion the bill was laid on the table for the present.
The bill [S. 13--Mr. Wood's] authorizing guardians to settle the estate of deceased wards, coming up with a majority report embracing an amendment. The report was concurred in and the bill ordered engrossed for the third reading.
The bill [S. 38--Mr. Trusler's] regarding the letting of contracts for the building of bridges, coming up with a committee report recommending indefinite postponement.
Mr. TRUSLER opposed concurrence in the reports--stating reasons and considerations why the bill should become a law. He was wilting it should lie on the table till senators had time to more carefully examine its provisions.
On motion of Mr. COMSTOCK it was laid on the table and then the Senate adjourned.
The SPEAKER called the House to order, and announced prayers by the representative from Washington county (Mr. MITCHELL.)
The reading of the journal was ordered, add the clerk proceeded to read until--
On the motion of Mr. LEHMAN the further reading was disposed with.
The SPEAKER called for reports from committees, which were submitted on the following described hills,the recommendations being concurred in by the House unless otherwise stated:
On Mr. Tulley's bill, [H. R. 227] to repeal the act for the protection of fish, recommending that it lie on the table.
On Mr. Schwitzer's bill, [H. R. 219] to repeal an act for the protection of fish, recommending that it lie on the table.
On Mr. Edwin's bill, [H. R. 19] for the protection of fish, recommending that it lie on the table.
On Mr Dalton's bill, [H. R. 17] to repeal the act for the construction of railroads by counties and townships ;, with an amendment recommending its passage.
Mr. HUMPHREYS and Mr. SHANKS submitted further amendments.
On the motion of Mr. OSBORNE, of Elkhart, the bill was laid on the table.
On Mr. Edwin's bill, [H. R. 214] to regulate passenger fare on railroads, with an amendment striking out the emergency clause, and recommending passage.
Mr. OSBORNE, of Elkhart counseled carefulness in voting concurrence in such committee reports, as the effect was the amending of the bill. 0n his motion the bill was ordered engrossed for the 3d reading.
On Mr. Davidson's bill, [H. R. 62] for the organization of county boards, with a recommendation of indefinite postponement
On Mr. Copeland's bill [H. R. 287] to abridge the duties of county superintendent,
with the recommendation that it be referred to the
On Mr. Mitchell's bill [H. R. 313] to provide for a more speedy way of listing personal property, with the recommendation that it be indefinitely postponed.
On Mr. Baker's bill [H. R. 41] to repeal an act regarding eligibility to office of township trustee, recommending its passage.
Mr. BAKER explaining that the object of the bill was to legalize the election of last April.
Mr. OSBORNE of Elkhart, thought the bill transcended the power of this Legislature.
Mr. OVERMEYER read from page 79 of the acts of the special session of 1877, the act that this bill proposed to repeal. He was opposed to the repeal of this law, and declared that there was never a better law on the subject. The principal business of the trustee was to levy taxes, and he could so manipulate matters as to hold on to his office for a longer time than was profitable to the tax-payer. It was for that reason that the law of two years ago was passed. The trustee would go out of office by statute limitation. He was opposed to concurring in the report of the committee, and on his motion it was laid on the table.
Mr. LEHMAN offered an amendment, which was adopted, to strike out the first section.
Mr. WORKS make an ineffectual motion to lay the bill on the table.
Mr. SLEETH said that the motion to strike out the first section strikes out the enacting clause, and has the effect to destroy the bill.
Mr. VANPELT and Mr. CALDWELL thought the bill of sufficient importance to merit the consideration of the House, and hoped it might come up yet in some shape.
Mr. OSBORN, of Elkhart, said the bill was gone from the action of the House, and on his motion It was indefinitely postponed.
On Mr. Edwin's bill [H. R.213] to authorize sheriff's to administer oaths, with a substitute therefor [H. R. 364] authorizing sheriffs to administer oaths in all matters pertaining to the duties of their office. The bill was read the first time and passed to the second reading.
The
The report was accepted, and laid on the table.
The committee also returned the bill [H. R. 340--Mr. Humphrey's]for legislative apportionment, recommending passage with sundry amendments.
Mr. KIRKPATRICK submitted a minority report recommending that the bill lie on the
table. He thought the committee was all along disposed to be fair in this matter, but
the Republican members of the committee felt compelled to present a minority report,
because the counties of Lagrange and Steuben get by this bill but one representative,
while such counties as Perry, Owen, Pike and Lake each get a representative, no one of
which
Mr. GORDON, in order that members may have time to consider this bill, moved it be made the special order for Tuesday next at 2 o'clock.
Mr. HUMPHREYS stated that the Republican have a larger representation in this bill than the Democrats, so far as members are concerned. When the vote was put in the committee room last night there was not a dissenting voice.
Mr. OVERMEYER cited figures which made him think this does not look like a fail-bill. He would like to see it considered in committee of the Whole House, and made that motion.
Mr. GORDON accepted the amendment. He wanted only a fair apportionment--the districts to be contiguous and giving a fair representation to the minority. There can be but two great political parties, and they are the means through which the people express themselves. He insisted on a fair representation without reference to party. Wherever a district is formed in which a nomination is equivalent to an election, you wink at corruption.
Mr. HUMPHREYS moved to make this subject the special order for 10 o'clock Friday.
Mr. CALDWELL said the excitement over this bill has grown up since the adjournment of the committee last night.
Mr. SHANKS was a member of the committee. There seemed to be a show of fairness in the committee room, and he did not propose to condemn their action. The Republican members of the committee were nearly all from one portion of the State, and did not know as well as they should about other portions of the State. He desired further time to consider the provisions of this bill.
The motion (Mr. Humphrey's] was agreed to.
On motion by Mr. COMPTON his bill [H. R. 7] regulating the working of coal mines way ordered engrossed for the third reading.
On motion by Mr. ALLEN the bill [H. R. 15--Mr. Lehman's] legalizing Edinburgh town elections was ordered engrossed.
On motion by Mr. DRAKE the bill [H. R. 15--Mr. Reed's] concerning cemeteries was ordered engrossed.
Then came the recess till 2 o'clock p. m.
The SPEAKER proceeded with the call by counties for the introduction of bills, resolutions, etc.
Mr. CALDWELL offered a resolution, which was adopted, for a joint convention of the two houses, on February Sat 10 o'clock a. m., for the election of a librarian and directors of the State prisons north and south.
By Mr. CAMPBELL, H. R. 365] to protect public highways and ditches from animals running at large.
By Mr. HART, [H. R. 366] to reduce the salaries of members of the General Assembly to $4 per day.
Mr. DONNELL [H. R. 367] to limit the number and increase the jurisdiction of justices of the peace.
By Mr. MARCH, a resolution, which was adopted, that the Superintendent of Public Instruction be requested to report to this House to what extent, if any, the rate of taxation for school purposes in the local levies can be reduced without injury to the efficiency of the common schools.
By Mr CAREY, [H. R. 368] for the relief of George M. Winchell and other sureties of Jos. D. Bearley, a defaulting trustee.
By Mr. HUMPHREY, [H. R. 369] to amend section 5 of an act to provide for a uniform assessment of property. Also [H. R. 376] to repeal an act, amending section 316 of the general practice act.
By Mr. HANDY, [H. R. 371] creating the Forty-third Judicial Circuit.
By Mr. CUNNINGHAM, [H. R. 372 ] to repeal section 1 of an act to amend section 3 of an act of the common school law.
By Mr. WIMMER, [H. R. 373] to amend section 2 of an act in relation to trespassing animals.
By Mr. OVERMEYER, [H. R. 374] to amend section 2 of an act in relation to county auditors, approved May 31, 1852.
By Mr. OVERMEYER, [H. R. 375] concerning parties to actions.
By Mr TAYLOR,of Legrange, [H. R. 376] for an act defining certain misdemeanors.
By Mr. EDWINS, [H. R. 377] to regulate the practice of medicine.
By Mr. GORDON, [H. R. 378] supplemental to an act defining misdemeanors. Also, a resolution that the Committee on Ways and Means report a bill exempting property of unmarried women of the age of 21 years from taxation. He said the principle in this resolution was identical with the principle that precipitated the war of the revolution.
Mr. SLEETH referred to the resolution as unconstitutional, and while willing to be as gallant as the gentleman from Marion [Mr. Gordon], he was not willing to sacrifice his conscientious scruples on the alter of gallantry. Such a provision can only be enacted after amendment of the organic law.
Mr. GORDON. The constitution can be so amended and if the object desired cannot be otherwise attained be should favor amendment of the constitution.
Mr. OVERMEYER moved to amend by instructing the committee to report a bill conferring the right of suffrage.
Mr. GORDON accepted the amendment.
Mr. HANDY moved to lay the resolution on the table.
This motion was agreed to by yeas 44, nays 42.
Mr. SAINT offered a resolution instructing the
Mr. SHANKS made an ineffectual motion to strike out the word "unmarried."
Mr. SLEETH was willing to vote for instruction to the committee as to the propriety of extending to all women the right of suffrage. He did not want to discriminate against unmarried women. A woman should not be disfranchised because she may be either married or unmarried.
Mr. SAINT desired the sense of the House as to whether it was willing to grant the right of suffrage to women who are tax-payers.
Mr. HANDY moved to lay the resolution on the table.
The yeas and nays being demanded and taken resulted--yeas 42, nays 46.
So the motion was rejected.
Mr. OVERMEYER to amend so that the committee inquire into the expediency of conferring the right of suffrage upon all women.
Mr. SAINT accepted the amendment.
The yeas and nays being taken, resulted--yeas, 58; nays, 28.
So the resolution was adopted.
By Mr. MIERS, [H. R. 379] for an act to prevent railroad accidents.
On motion the House proceeded to take up the business on the speaker's table.
The SPEAKER laid before the House a communication from the governor relative to the Antiedan cemetery; also from the trustees of the Prison South relating to expenses, and from the trustees of the Deaf and Dumb Asylum on the same subject matter.
The bill [S. 4] to abolish the superior court in the county of Wayne coming up, was read the third time and passed the House of Representatives by--yeas 79, nays 2.
Engrossed bill [S. 51] fixing the time of holding circuit courts in the Eleventh judicial circuit coming up in order, was read the third time and passed the House of Representatives by--yeas 77, nays 1.
And then the House adjourned.
After prayers, by Rev. Dr. ANDRUS, of Central Avenue M. E. church, of this city, the secretary's minutes of yesterday's proceedings were read, corrected and approved.
The LIEUTENANT GOVERNOR laid before the Senate the first official communication from the auditor of state since his qualification, as follows:
DEAR SIR-I have Just been placed in receipt of a resolution adopted by the
Senate directing me to request county auditors, treasurers, clerks and sheriffs to
report, the amount of salaries, fees, emoluments and perquisites received by them
during the year 1878. In reply I have the honor to say that a similar resolution
was passed by the House, and in compliance with same blanks were prepared by my
predecessor and forwarded to the county officers to eligible them to make the
desired reports, and this office is now daily in receipt of the replies in
compliance with the resolution of the House. These reports will be compiled and
permitted to the House by the 10th of February, the time mentioned in the
resolution. I suppose the desired information will be furnished the Senate by the
The LIEUTENANT GOVERNOR also laid before the Senate the following communication:
Dear Sir--In reply to a resolution of the Senate, requesting this office to give a statement for the information of the Senate of all the moneys drawn from the State treasury by the State University, State Normal school, and Purdue university, for the year 1878, I have the honor to say that in response to a resolution of the House, a statement was prepared in this office by my predecessor, giving an exhibit in detail of the amount of moneys drawn from the State treasury by the foregoing institutions for the last four years, and I take pleasure in herewith transmitting to you a printed copy of the statements.
The statement sets forth that during the years 1875, 1876, 1877, and 1878, there was drawn from the State treasury by the State University the sum of $121,738,00. The total amount drawn from the State treasury by Purdue University during the same time was $33,235.42. The amount drawn from the State treasury by the State Normal school for four years ending October 31,1878, was $98,291.85.
The lieutenant governor also laid before the Senate a communication from Patrick H. Jameson, president of the board of benevolent Institutions, transmitting itemized statements of receipts and expenditures of the incidental funds. At the insane hospital the receipts for the two fiscal years ending October 31, 1878,from the sales of hides, tallow and other products was $8,852.01, and the disbursements from the Incidental fund for the same time amounted to $14,010.91.
At the Institution for the deaf and dumb the disbursements on account of incidental expenses for the year ending October 31, 1877, amounted to $7,502.63. and for the year ending October 31, 1878, $5,256.66--all drawn from the state treasury,
"The statement of Wm H. Churchman, superintendent of the Institute for the Blind, settling for the Items of the incidental expenses of said institution," covers over fifty pages of legal cap size paper, finely written, but is not footed up, neither in total nor on any one of the pages,
On motion by Mr. Fowler, chairman of the
And then the Senate took a recess till 2 o'clock p. m.
the LIEUTENANT GOVERNOR announced the special order for this hour being the bill [S. 80--Mr. Kramer's] abolishing the office of assessor and treasurer in cities and towns, on the second reading.
Mr. DICE agreed with the main features of this bill, but it will be a hardship for men paid in towns to have to go in the county seat to get the money on their warrants. He moved to amend by striking out section 2, which would obviate this objection.
Mr. VIEHE: If the second section be stricken out, the third section would have to be amended in order to make the bill consistent.
Mr. DICE modified his amendment, so as to strike out both sections 2 and 3.
Mr. URMSTON thought all the sections of this bill should be stricken out. Under the present law towns may either have an assessor of their own, or adopt the assessment made by the township assessor. He also urged the objection referred to by the senator from Fountain [Mr. Dice.]
Mr. KRAMER insisted senators did not, understand the provisions of his bill. It proposes simply to do away with two or three offices that are entirely unnecessary. Then the people ought to elect, the town marshal, as provided for, in this bill, instead of allowing that officer to be chosen by the trustees, as is now the case. In his county this bill would save to the tax-payers annually some $400 or $500, and in large counties there would be a much greater saving.
Mr. GRUBBS was against the whole bill. It is the intent and spirit of our law to make our corporations distinct and separate--a sovereignty within a sovereignty--which is the right principle of government; and they should be allowed to manage their own affairs in their own way. This bill is also objectionable because it would ten to complicate matters--and the affairs of county treasurers are sufficiently complicated now, without further burdening them with the finances of towns and cities.
Mr. REEVE opposed the bill because wholly impracticable. It would tear down without making reparation. For the purpose of cheapening the administrations of town or city government it would leave an entire irresponsibility, and even then defeat the object it is intended to accomplish. The town authorities have no control, of the remotest character, over the county treasurer. Every provision except the election of marshal and the abolishment of treasurer may be had under existing laws.
Mr. WOOLLEN thought this bill not wholly bad. A substitute embodying the provisions of the first section would be an excellent one, and save much money to the several towns and cities of the state.
Mr. DICE believed there are several good provisions in this bill and with his amendments it ought to pass.
Mr. HARRIS--Indianapolis has a city duplicate of fifty million of dollars. He was not prepared to say this city desired the office of assessor abolished, but the people desire a bill prepared to relieve tax payers; and he would like to see the bill recommitted that Senators might consider how it may be perfected.
Mr. FOWLER thought, there were good features in this bill, but the County Treasurer and assessor should not control the revenue of such a city as Indianapolis. He also would like to see the bill recommitted, and made that motion.
Mr. FOSTER opposed the bill--if cities be stricken from it towns should be also.
Mr. URMSTON moved to indefinitely postpone the bill.
Mr. OLDS objected so committing the bill. The Senate can as well determine its action now as at any other time.
Mr. BRISCOE demanded the previous question, which was seconded by the Senate, and
under its operation the motion to indefinitely postpone the bill was rejected by 16,
nays 33, and the motion to recommit to the
The bill [S. 88--a substitute for Mr. Comstock's] to provide for the appointment [by the circuit judge of each county] of a Probate Commissioner, and for the more speedy settlement of decedents' estates, being also a special order for this afternoon. Coming up on the second reading--
Mr. REEVE considered this bill more important than any other one proposition that will come before the General Assembly. There are 4600 estates and guardianships that have not received proper attention for years in the district he comes from. The bill provides this commissioner shall be similar in many respects to surrogates in States that have that official. The bill will produce immense benefits to the masses of the people at a trifling expense. After careful consideration senators must conclude this bill to be a necessity for the protection of estates and the interested minors and wards, in view of the accumulation of that class of business in a State with as large a population as this.
Mr. BRISCOE moved to amend section 3 by striking out the world "freeholder" where referring to the qualifications of the commissioner.
Mr. OLDS regarded the 4th section as empowering this commissioner to be a smelling committee of one; and, as far as he had examined the bill it had not impressed him very favorably. To give time for further examination, he moved to postpone the consideration of the bill till Monday next at 2 o'clock p.m.
Mr. FOWLER regarded it absolutely unnecessary to make some change in the management of probate business, which now gets very little attention compared with what it ought to have. He had read the substitute carefully, and could not see any merit in it, or, at least, could see nothing that can not be attained by existing laws. He moved its indefinite postponement.
Mr. COMSTOCK learning that majority of his constituents are opposed to a probate court, readily consented to the committee , reporting this constitute. Where districts desire a probate commission it is nothing more than right they should have one, consequently he should vote against the pending motion to indefinitely postpone, and for the bill at the proper time.
Mr. BURRELL thought there were merits in this bill. If there is one thing above another the people want, it is that probate business shall be speedily transacted, that is shall be closed up before bondsman die or become insolvent and thus endanger estates and the interests of minors and wards. This bill ought not to be indefinitely postponed. If the people need this bill we ought to give it to them.
Mr. SHAFFER did not think this substitute would meet the demands of the majority of
the people of the State, nor the people of his district, because it will not aid
judges in the dispatch of probate business. The people want and demand the passage of
a law
Mr. HARRIS did not think a man would be found fit to take a place on a probate bench for less than $1,500, a year, and the cost to the State of a Probate Courts would be from $100,000 to $150,000 annually; an expense too great to enter into in these times. Estates of widows and orphans, it is said, are being frittered away in many districts in this State, and for this reason he was willing to vote for this bill. We can not abolish circuit courts because those judges are judicial officers under the Constitution. This bill makes no charge upon the State. The pay of the Commissioner will come out of the county wanting such an officer; and while such a bill is not needed in his county, it might be very acceptable to many other counties in the State.
Mr. Hefron while recognizing the necessity for some legislation in this direction, he failed to see where this bill would relieve in the least degree the labors of the judge. It creates an officer at considerable expense with no benefit to the tax-payer,
Mr. Foster demanded the previous question, Which was seconded by the Senate, and under its operation the bill was indefinitely postponed.
And then the Senate adjourned.
The SPEAKER called the House to order. Prayer by Representative Davis of Boone county.
The journal was being read, when--
On the motion of Mr. LINDLEY, the further reading was dispensed with.
The SPEAKER then called for reports from committees.
Mr. BRIGGS, from the committee on the organization of courts, returned Mr. Stucker's bill [H. R. 198] reducing the jurisdiction of the circuit court and in creasing that of justices of the peace.
On the motion of Mr. GORDON the bill was laid on the table.
The bill [H. R.76--Mr. Lehman's] to amend the justice act with a recommendation with the amendments submitted, the bill do pass. The amendments of the committee were concurred in, and the bill ordered to the engrossment.
Mr. BRIGGS explaining that under the law as it now stood, cases may be taken from one justice to another. The object of his bill was to limit parties to but one change. The amendment was simply to strike out two changes and make but one.
MR. LINDLEY'S bill [H. R. 169,] giving justices of the peace jurisdiction over all defendants in any suit upon a promissory note was returned with a recommendation that it lie on the table.
MR. L1NDLEY said the bill was introduced for the purpose of obviating the trouble incident to collections by suit instituted before justices of the peace. It not unfrequently occurs that the principle on a promissory note resides on one side of a county or township line, while the surety resides on the other side of the line, in another township or county, and in such cases the payee of such note is put to a good deal of trouble, inconvenience and expense, in order to procure service upon all the defendants and the collection of a just claim. The purpose of the bill is to provide in such cases the justice before whom suit is instituted having jurisdiction over the principal defendants shall also have jurisdiction over other defendants in such suit, and may send his constable across such county or township line to procure service upon other sureties. The bill is so fair and just that, had the committee carried out the instructions of the House to notify the author of a bill when the same would be considered by them. he would have had little difficulty in prevailing upon the committee to make a favorable report.
Mr. Shields' bill [H. R. 80] to amend section 20 of the general practice act of June, 1852; that it lie on the table.
Mr. BRIGGS, explaining the provisions of the bill, said that it simply doubled the time for stays on execution.
Mr. SHIELDS said the bill provides for doubling the time now fixed by law for the stay of executions on judgments. He had been induced to withdraw the bill in order that the mass of the people who had been impoverished by class legislation should find some relief from the financial crisis which now threatened their utter and irretrievable ruin. He hoped the bill would not be laid on the table, but that it would go upon the files, and receive from this body that candid consideration to which the importance of the question involved in its provisions entitled it. He knew the people were de,anding relief, and that they would be much disappointed to find that their representatives here were indifferent to their welfare.
Mr. HEROD said the report should be concurred in. He thought if this bill should become a law it would work against the laboring man, he was opposed to giving any longer stay on execution.
Mr. SHANKS thought to extend the stay on executions would certainly be to the interest of the man who earned his bread by the sweat of his brow.
Mr. WILLARD insisted that the State should give all the relief possible to the debtor class.
Mr. HANDY thought the indications were very plain that it was the intention of this House to reduce the rate of interest from 10 to 6 per cent. When money loaned a few years ago shall have to be collected by execution and sale, it will then work hard against the laboring man.
Mr. BRIGGS did not think this was the proper way to get at the remedy sought for. The proper course would be to pass a law exempting a reasonable amount of the property from sale on execution. The stay should not be extended.
Mr. WATSON would go as far as any one for the relief of that class of our citizens who are burdened with debt. He did not think the House should take any action on the matter now.
Mr. MITCHELL was as much interested in the laboring class as any one, and for that reason he was favorable to extending the time for stays of execution.
Mr. OVERMEYER: If the stay on execution was necessary it should have been provided for by law some time ago. The necessity for it, if there ever was one, is gone by. Why come in now and pass such a law? What man can be induced to loan his money if you allow judgments to be stayed for 865 days? Six months was long enough. By the passage of such an act you would drive loaning capital out of the State.
Mr.TAYLOR, of Daviess, thought that the laboring class known as farmers--of which he
was one--were not asking for this kind of a law. He thought the law as it stands now was
good enough, and he would rather vote for
Mr. OSBORNE of Elkhart--Ninteen twentieths of our population are debtors and creditors. The law as it now stands have given satisfaction. It goes far enough for the man who loans his money. He thought the law ought to stand as it is. Permanence in law is what will benefit the people most.
Mr. HUMPHREY was in favor of the law and opposed to the report of the committee. He therefore moved to lay the report of the committee on the table and asked for the yeas and nays--which being taken resulted--yeas 25, nays 64--so the motion was rejected.
On the motion of Mr. HEROD the report of the committee was concurred in, and so the bill lies on the table.
The bill [H. R. 23] to create the Forty-third Judicial Circuit, was indefinitely postponed.
Mr. GORDON said: As he did not feel very well, and inasmuch as there was about to be enacted a terrible tragedy on this square [referring to the hanging of Merrick and Achey], he moved that the House do now adjourn.
According, the House took a recess until 2 o'clock.
The SPEAKER resumed at 2 o'clock and pursued the order of business at the close of the morning session.
were submitted on the following described bills, the recommendations being concurred in by the House, unless otherwise stated:
On Mr. Lehman's bill, [H. R. 77] to prescribe the power of justices of the peace.
On Mr. DALTON'S bill [H. R. 289] for the election of justice of the peace and prescribing jurisdiction: lie on the table.
On Mr. OVERMEYER'S bill [H. R. 13] to amend section 172 of an act prescribing the manner of impanelling petit jurors--with amendments.
Mr. OVERMEYER explaining said it simply reduces the number of jurors in the circuit, criminal and superior courts from 12 to 6.
Mr. BRIGGS cited the 20th section of article 1 of the constitution, "In all civil cases the right of trial by jury shall remain inviolate." He insisted this matter should be carefully investigated.
Mr. OVERMEYER did not believe that after we had enacted such a law the supreme court would every say that the Legislation had not right to decide how many men should constitute a jury. The expense of our judicial system is more than it should be. If you reduce the number of jurors to 6 in every case, you save $200,000 a year to the people. Six jurymen can try a case as well as 12.
Mr. GORDON (interrupting): If it is economy you are after solely, give but one juryman.
Mr. OVERMEYER (continuing): Let us concur in the report, order the bill engrossed, and if the House think best, then we can pass it.
Mr. SHANKS: When the framers of our courts said the General Assembly may modify or abolish the grand jury system, they did not intend we should reduce the number of petit jurors, or they would have said so. Ever since man was put upon trial for his life, 12 men have constituted a jury.
Mr. SLEETH regarded this as one of the most important measures that will come before this legislature, and was willing it shall lie upon the table that members may have an opportunity to examine it. Since the adoption of our constitution, and for 1,000 years before, juries have been composed of twelve men. He insisted where the word "jury" occurs in the constitution it mean 12 men.
Mr. OSBORNE of Elkhart, would favor changing the number of jurors in certain cases. Civil cases might as well be tried by 6 jurors, and it is in the power of the Legislature to make such a provision.
The Supreme Court has decided that a criminal jury can not be composed of less than 12 men. No criminal can be denied his right of trial by jury of 12 men.
Mr. MARCH had a great respect for the Constitution, but no respect for the divinity
of numbers. On his motion the bill was referred to the
On Mr. Allen's bill, [H. R. 122] to authorize cities and towns to sell bonds to build school houses: That the bill pass. It was ordered engrossed for the third reading.
On Mr. Taylor of Warrick's bill [H. R. 44] to amend sec. 2 of the common school law; laid on the table.
On Mr. Schwitzer's bill [H. R. 250] for compulsory education; indefinitely postponed.
On Mr. Davidson's bill [H. R. 277] to amend the common school law; indefinitely postponed.
On Mr. Perry's bill [H. R. 136] for the protection of fish; laid on the table.
On Mr. Compton's bill [H. R. 271] concerning street railways. With amendments that it pass.
Mr. COMPTON explained: It provides that street railways may be run on streets or public roads by first getting permission of the county commissioners on such terms as they may agree.
The bill was ordered engrossed.
On Mr. Mitchell's bill [H. R. 46] to amend section 1 of the township election act of March 3, 1877, with an amendment, that is so pass.
It was ordered engrossed.
On Mr. Garroutte's bill [H. R. 138] requiring township trustees to appropriate any surplus funds now on hand to the benefit of the road fund, that the bill so pass.
Mr. GARROUTTE said: The object of the bill is to transfer the surplus township fund now on hand in the hands of township trustees to the road fund and to be used for that purpose and to legalize such transfer where heretofore made by said trustees. In many townships this fund has accumulated to large amounts and should be used in the improvement of the road. Many trustees have use this fund for road purposes, contrary to law. This bill legalizes such acts of trustees. This is all that there is in the bill. This bill is of importance, and I hope it will pass this House.
Mr. BAKER reported this as an act legalizing what has already been done by some township trustees.
Mr. HARLAN favored and Mr. FAULKNER opposed the bill.
On motion by Mr. LINDLEY, the bill was amended by striking out all that legalizes the transfer of one fund to that of another.
On Mr. HEROD'S bill, [H. R. 96] regulating the inspection of petroleum: That it pass. It was ordered engrossed.
On Mr. Van Valzah's bill, [H. R. 140] to legalize the annexation of lands to cities and towns with amendments. It was ordered engrossed.
On Mr. Briggs' bill, [H. R. 135] to legalize the acts of the board of the town of Shelbourne. It was finally passed by the House by yeas 74, nays 4.
On Mr. Taylor's, of Warrick, bill [H. R. 141] legalizing the act of the board of the town of Boonville.
On the motion of Mr. HEROD, the bill was considered engrossed, read the third time
and
Mr. FAULKNER explaining when his name was called that he was opposed to legalizing the acts of officials when they had the law before them. He voted "no."
On the motion of Mr. DALTON, his bill [H. R. 17] was taken from the table, amended by Mr. Shanks, and ordered engrossed upon a division--affirmative, 28; negative, 27.
On Mr. Osborne's, of Elkhart, bill, [H. R. 252] defining fornication. It was ordered engrossed.
The following bills for acts were introduced, read the first time, and passed to the second reading:
By Mr. GORDON, [H. R. 380] to amend the act regulating foreign insurance companies.
By Mr. NAVE, [H. R. 381] to amend section 58 of an act to repeal all laws now in force for the organization of towns and cities, etc.
By Mr. REED, [H. R. 382] to amend section 9 an act for a general system of common schools.
By Mr. KIRKPATRICK, [H. R. 383] to legalize the Kokomo Gaslight and Coke Company.
By Mr. MAJOR, [H. R. 384] for the protection of fish.
By Mr. MIERS, [H. R. 385] to exempt growing crops from sale on execution until the same shall have fully matured.
By Mr. RODMAN, [H. R. 387] to amend section 635 of the general practice act.
By Mr. RODMAN, [H. R. 388] to divide the public highways among the owners of land, and to create the office of road commissioner.
The House then adjourned until 10 o'clock to-morrow.
After prayer by Rev. Mr. Pyle, of the Third Street, M. E. church--
The bill, [S. 30--Mr. Weir's] authorizing guardians to settle the estate of deceased wards was read The third time, and finally passed the Senate by--46 yeas, nays 1.
The bill. [S. 58--Mr. Harris'] requiring able bodied prisoners in jails to be put to work by county commissioners, was read the third time and passed by--yeas 48, nays 0.
The bill, [S. 71--Mr. Leeper's] authorizing justices to require additional replevin bail where the same is insufficient, was read the third time and passed by yeas 44, nays 0.
The bill, [S. lOl--Mr.Sarnighausen's]to repeal the act of March 6, 1865, authorizing the formation of water works companies in cities, was read the third time and passed by--yeas 46, nays 4.
The bill, [S. 125--Mr. Foster's] for the conviction of persons in possession of property feloniously brought into the state in the same manner as if the felony were committed in the state--was read the third time and passed--yeas, 49; nays 6.
The bill, [S. 138--Mr. Reeve's] authorizing the combining and the loaning of fractional sums belonging to the school funds, and requiring full distribution of all funds required to be on hand by law, was read the third time, and passed by yeas, 41; nays, 6.
The bill [S. 138--Mr. Ragan's] for appointment of inspector of elections from the party in the majority in the last election previous for secretary of state in the precinct, was read the third time and failed to pass--yeas 21, nays 27.
The bill [S. 192-Mr. Grubbs'] adding to section 468 of the general practice act of June 18, 1852, a provision that the plaintiff or his agent shah be notified by mail or otherwise of the time and place of the sale of personal property on execution.
Mr. GRUBBS explained that the bill was intended to render more certain the sales of property on execution.
Mr. MENZIE couldn't see why the plaintiff should stand on more favored ground than the defendant. The former is supposed to take due notice of the time and clay of sale because he takes the property of the defendant by force. This bill proposes an unnecessary change and discriminates in favor of the party who has brought to his aid the machinery of the law.
Mr. REEVE referred to the well known fact that under an execution, if it runs 180 days and contemplates more than one appraisement of property, the time of action is uncertain and entirely optional with the officer; and it looks unreasonable to require they party plaintiff to dance attendance of the officer in order to ascertain when the property will be sold, in order that he may be present and bid off the property or let it go without action on his part. This bill is an eminently proper one--it can do nobody any harm and would be beneficial to all concerned. There could be no objection to the officer notifying both parties. The presumption is, the property being advertised in the neighborhood where it was seized would induce the defendant to look after it, while the plaintiff may reside at a long distance and know nothing about it.
Mr. BRISCOE: The bill proposes to make extra costs for the defendant, if the plaintiff should live at a long distance, or even be a non resident, if his attorneys are faithful to their trust they will notify him of everything that is necessary.
Mr. COMSTOCK: The objection that the bill makes an unfair discrimination in proposing to give notice to the plaintiff and not to the defendant also, while making additional costs for the defendant, is sufficiently answered by the senator fro Marshall [Mr. Reeve] in this, that the plaintiff may not be resident of the county, and it can't possibly do any harm. The attorney for the plaintiff amy be absent from the county. The plaintiff may be a non-resident, and this bill would give him an opportunity to make the amount of his claim, and to do no harm to the defendant. He saw no reason why the bill should not pass.
Mr. VIEHE also thought the bill should pass. It has been said that it is the duty of
the plaintiff's attorney to know all the proceedings of the sheriff. As a matter of fact
that is
Mr. GRUBBS regarded this bill as being in the interest of economy. There are innumberable offers of personal property in this State where there are no sales, thus incurring costs upon defendants because of the fact that the plaintiff are not advised where the sales are to be. Senators say, Why not advise both? Simply because it is not necessary: the defendant is notified that has property is taken-- he knows that fact; and in addition the statute provides that notice shall be given in the township in which the property is taken, and in which the sale is to be made.
The bill finally passed the Senate by yeas 34, nays 16.
Mr. STREIGHT offered the knowing:
Resolved by the senate, the House of Representatives concurring therein. That, with a view of attracting immigration from abroad, the state geologist is hereby instructed to have prepared, in a brief and condensed a form as practicable, a pamphlet setting for the resources and advantages of Indiana; that the same be accompanied by a small map of the State showing its civil divisions, and by a certificate of the governor, and by a copy of his resolution, and that, 100,000 copies thereof be printed in English and in the same number in German, for distribution in this and other counties, under the direction of the state geologist.
It was rejected by yeas 151, nays 31.
Bills for acts were introduced, read the first time and severally referred to appropriate committees as follows:
By Mr. DICE, [S. 295] to regulate the working and ventilation of coal mines and authorizing liens thereon for work or labor performed therein, which shall have priority of all but liens for taxes.
By Mr. POINDEXTER, [S. 296] fixing the time on holding circuit courts in the fourth judicial circuit.
By Mr. HEFRON, [S. 297] to abolish the office of State geologist, and transferring all appartus, etc., to the custody of State board of agriculture.
By Mr. CADWALLADER, [S. 298] providing for the recording of mortgages, declaring them to be a lien in priority of sale on execution or delivery and declaring deeds of real estate to be prior liens over mortgages in certain cases--where purchaser is ignorant of existing mortgages.
By Mr. STREIGHT, [S. 299] to prohibit any public officer entitled to mileage from using railroad passes while travelling on official business.
Messrs. Sarnighansen, Langdon, Reeve, Poindexter and Briscoe presented petitions, which were referred to appropriate committees without reading.
Then came the recess till 2 o'clock p. m.
The LIEUTENANT GOVERNOR announced the special order being the consideration of the bill S. 277, and the subject of interest generally.
On motion by Mr. HARRIS the Senate resolved itself into a
Mr. MENZIES moved to strike out of the first section the words "when the parties do not agree," and also the words "unless the same be in writing, signed by the party to be charged thereby, and in such case it shall not be lawful to contract for more than eight per cent, per annum."
Mr. REEVE: That destroys the purpose of the bill, and leaves the rate absolutely at six per cent. Thousands of people have been compelled to mortgage everything they have: capital is gradually being invested in business ventures now, and unless people are allowed to renew their obligations at the original rate of interest, they will go into absolute beggary; the effect, would be appalling; Indiana would sink to the very lowest position in the scale of States. It is just such legislation as this that now makes war between labor and capital. This amendment amounts to this: A body of 50 men say to 2,000,000 of people, "You shall not exercise your own judgment in the borrowing of money." The same principle would compel a man to have but a six inch leg to his boot. If you adopt such a system the tune will come when you will reap the terrible effects of proceeding: in direct violation of the natural laws that govern finance. Every time you bring down the rate too low, you make but a bid for the production or crime, for the people will have money when they must have it , even though it be obtained by circumventing interest acts. Once disregarding the law is but the entering: wedge that will eventually make it necessary to call in the policeman and the soldier. He appealed to senators to vote down the proposed amendment. Do not say to the people they shall not exercise their discretion in the matter of borrowing money.
Mr. HART. The people are demanding a reduction in the legal rate of interest. All the political parties are on record in favor of cutting down; and why should we hesitate? The laboring men, who sustain this Government, are anxious for it: we have get to throw safeguards around the poorer class of people, and the sooner we do it the better.
Mr. HEFRON did not think very great calamities would before the people if the legal rate of interest be fixed at 6 percent. The great mass of the people of Indiana demand a measure of this kind. No legitimate business can be carried on profitably in this State and pay interest at 10 per cent. The argument that the people will violate a law reducing the rate to 6 percent, is not argument against passing a law demanded by the times; if it were, jails had better be closed and statute books burned.
Mr. WOODS--The demands of capital are from ten to twenty per cent. There is no such a thing as satisfying the demands of capital. But go among business men and they will say they can not afford to pay more than six per cent. Here on one side is the great producing interest and on the other side stands capital. Now who can hesitate as between the two? Business is depressed because money has found an avenue that yields greater revenue--it has gone into the loan channels where it can earn ten per cent. Six per cent, now is worth as much as twelve per cent, five years ago , and that being the case why should capital complain of a six per cent law.
Mr. TRUSLER could not understand why we should legislate upon two rates of interest.
It is contended the higher rate will benefit the poorer class, but who are crying out
for the higher rate? It is the capitalist. Capital is educated, capital has been to
school and knows how to compute interest; yes, and compound it, too. In other
countries it has ground labor in the dust; but thank God it can't do it in this
country. No great object can be accomplished without uniting capital and labor, then
Mr. OLDS finds 12 of the States have no limit as to contracts for rates of interest, and 17 allow 12 per cent, to 20. This proposition for putting down the rate to 6 per cent, would be ruinous. Parties now holding mortgages on real property in this State would foreclose and take the realty. There are but few clamoring for the reduction, and they mostly men who have broken themselves up. A half dozen of them will make more noise about it then 500 good and substantial citizens. It is better tat every one should make such contracts as they please. For the present he should favor the bill as it came from the hands of the committee.
Mr. STREIGHT asked by what manner of means the advocates of this measure can borrow money at 6 per cent. Does not this amendment mean that no one having less credit than the government itself shall borrow money? Why should you deny a man the right to borrow money at any rate he may see fit, any more than you would deny him the right to buy dinner at any price he may choose to pay? Years ago when there was a 6 per cent law in this State money was universally loaned at a greater rate all over the State. If senators think they can bring down the rate of interest to 6 per cent, by simply enacting a law, why not make it 4 or 3 per cent.? The man who has money to loan will but laugh at such laws. No class of men have sunk larger per cent of capital in the last five years than bankers. The result of low interest laws have never benefitted the man of poor means. The man who loans money can not afford to loan as cheaply to the poorer classes as he can to those in better circumstances. Money will bring what it is worth, just as wheat and corn and pork does. He would support this bill for the reason that money has got down to be worth just about that much. This amendment means that if your neighbor can not borrow money at 6 per cent, he shall not borrow at all. Many States have abandoned the idea of legislating on the subject of interest, and he hoped this State would come to that before many years.
Mr. BRISCOE: This question should be ably and carefully considered, The eyes of the people of this State, as well as the sharks and Shylocks of New York, are turned to this Legislature at this time. The bill proposes only a difference of two per cent. from the present law. Nine out of ten uncollected notes in this State bear on their face ten per cent., and in a short time after the enactment of such a bill as this, the same proportion would show eight percent. If this bill will drive capital out of the State, let it go. He favored the fixing of a rate of Interest at six per cent.
Mr. REEVE: The only question is, Shall this Legislature restrict the people in the exercise of their discretion to the making of contracts for money at the rate of eight per cent.?
The amendment [Mr. MENZIES] was agreed to, upon a division--affirmative 26, negative 20.
On motion by Mr. MENZIES, the committee rose, reported progress, and asked leave to sit again to-morrow afternoon at 2 o'clock.
Mr. BURRELL moved to concur in the report, pending which, the Senate adjourned.
The SPEAKER called the House to order, and the journal of yesterday was being read when
On the motion of Mr ALLEN the further reading was dispensed with.
The SPEAKER said the first thing in order would be the special order--being the consideration of the proposed nine constitutional amendments.
Mr. Osborne of Elkhart submitted a concurrent resolution, the consideration of which was made the special order for next Saturday at 10 o' clock--for a concurrent vote for the election of officers of the benevolent institutions.
A call of the House was ordered and taken, which discovered as unexcused absent--Messrs. Dalton, Hess, Tully and Willard.
Further proceedings under the call were dispensed with.
On the motion of Mr. GORDON the House took up the consideration of the constitutional amendments.
The clerk then read the first proposition, being to amend section II of article 2, of the constitution prescribing the qualification of votes, as printed on pages 159 and 160, of the acts of the regular session of 1877.
Mr. OSBORNE of Elkhart, said, we all understood that to amend the constitution of the State is a matter of considerable importance. He supposed members have all made up their minds upon the subject, and he did not expect that anything he might say would change their opinion. He was in favor of throwing around the elective franchise every healthy restraint that would tend to purify or preserve it from fraud. The cry of fraud always accompanies an election, and has become so general as to detract largely from the respect and obedience due to the observance of the election laws. This government can only be sustained by the will of the people. There is no government where its laws can be enforced alone by the bayonet. In a free republic like ours we are all bound by the voice of the majority. There ought to be a time fixed in which a gain a residence, and that would tend greatly to security in the purity of the ballot box. The time state in the amendment--sixty days--had been recommended by statesman of such eminence that it impressed him favorably. He was in favor of the amendment.
Mr. GORDON: If there is one thing that has clung to his heart more than another for a long time, it is that this people may have a pure ballot. He cited cases in Morgan county in 1858. and along the Wabash, and during the war, when the sacred right of the elective franchize had been sorely abused and disgraced. He favored the 60 days clause required to gain a residence, in order that men who have no right to vote may be restrained. This action was but primary to the action of the people themselves, They understand what affects their welfare, and the man is not a friend to popular government who is not willing to trust the people. This amendment ought to pass.
Mr. MIERS thought this amendment would disfranchise many citizens. There was a class of people in the State who were compelled to seek for employment where they could get it, and to compel them to live in the township or ward for 60 days prior to the day of election would be to cut off their right of suffrage. He was opposed to a registry law for the reason that this same class of people could not afford to live one day to registering and another to voting. He should vote against the amendment.
Mr. Caldwell said: "Mr. Speaker I am opposed to this amendment, for the reason
that if adopted it will disfranchise not less than 10,000 voters in the great State of
Indiana. Why? Simply because the amendment affixes the status of the voter: it requires
a residence in the county of 60 days, and 30 days in the precinct where he offers to
vote. This is a dis-[crimination]
Mr KESTER though this amendment would deprive 20,000 of the sons of toil in Indiana of the elective franchise. We are not called upon to disfranchise so large a class in order to reach the few guilty ones. He should raise his voice and vote against so unjust a measure.
Mr. SNODDY did not think that to require a residence of 60 days would interfere with the vote of a laboring man. His people are in favor of the passage of this amendment.
Mr. HEROD would not be in the discharge of duty were he to fail in advocating the adoption of the proposed amendment. The laboring men are not the corrupt men in politics, He was in favor of this amendment. He had an abiding confidence that the expression of the will of the people would be in the right direction, and it is a duty we owe to posterity to make arrangements for the submission of the question to the people as soon as possible. This is not and should not be a political question. We are here to do the bidding of the people. He was thoroughly impressed with the necessity of this amendment.
And then came the recess till 2 o'clock.
A call of the House discovered all the unexcused members present except Mr. Saint, and he came in afterward.
Mr. DAILEY should vote against the amendment. There is tent one question in this. He would not object to a residence of 30 or 60 days, but to limit the territory to a ward would work hardships. A number of bona tide residents in every city are compelled to move about from place to place to seek employment. The poor man's right of suffrage is as dear to him as is the rich man's. This amendment is an indirect, proposition to narrow the right of suffrage. if a man happens to cross the line of a ward or township he is disfranchised, though he may have been a resident of the county for years or for a life time. Mr. D. did not like the register feature of the law. Our past experience in that line we should profit by. The constitution and laws are now broad enough if the proper guards are thrown around it,
Mr. WILLARD had left a sick bed in order to come here and be placed on the record on this question. There is no question of so vital importance to all the people as an amendment to the constitution. The majority of the people of the State are not supposed to understand questions in their legal aspect, and they have sent their representatives here to decide for them. There has never been adopted a resolution for amendment of the organic law so loosely drawn up as this one; and for that reason he should be compelled to vote against it, as it is beyond the reach of amendment. It is well known that a registry law could not be passed in this Legislature, and should this constitutional amendment be proposed to and ratified by the people the next General Assembly would be called upon to pass such a law. Commercial travelers might be disfranchised under this amendment, because it might be said they had no fixed residence for 60 days preceding an election. Is there any state in the Union, under the operation of a registry law,which protects the ballot-box from fraud? He did not want to see it tried in Indiana unless it be productive of good. We should hand the right of suffrage down to posterity as pure as we received it from our ancestry. Will you hamper it, and deprive 30,000 citizens of the right of suffrage? Why are Republicans so solicitous this amendment should go before the people? How did they pass the XVth amendment? They know they can no longer persuade the laboring classes to vote with them. I trust that the Democrats will vote against this amendment because the people do not demand it.
Mr. SAINT supposed it proper to explain his vote at this time. At first he was in favor of this amendment, but after reflection he does not believe it best for the people of the State. What is to be gained by it? Will the ballot-box be any more carefully guarded by this amendment? He said "No." Most infamous practices have been carried on under registry laws. Until there is more purity among lenders of parties legislation will not be respected as it should be. He would not argue this from any party stand- point. He should oppose any change in the laws that would deprive any class of fellow citizens of the right of suffrage.
Mr. OWEN favored the amendment because he favored free ballot. The poor man can not afford to be a candidate because he can not afford to pay for imported votes. Men seek to monopolize ballots as they would monopolize anything else. It is not liberty that would require a man to live in a township 60 days before he shall vote, it is a license. We want every man who has the right to deposit his ballot, and he should be protected in that right. The people understand what they want, and they are just as well qualified to vote upon this amendment as we are. He favored its adoption.
Mr. ENGLISH considered that no remonstrance has been offered against these amendments which have been proposed now for two years, and as the Senate has adopted them, they should receive his vote. If the people do not want them, they can decide upon them as intelligently as we.
Mr. THOMPSON did not know what his constituents would think of this amendment. The stride that Indiana has made in the past 15 years disputes the charge that great frauds have been perpetrated at the ballot box. He did not care what the cost would be in money; If we need a registry law, let us have it; but we do not need it. If it were for the good of the people he would favor it. Many mechanics have to move to find employment within 6 days of an election, and by so doing under this proposed amendment, he would lose his right to vote. And his rich landlord might serve a notice that would compel him to move within that time, and thus deprive him of the right of the elective franchise. We have had as good elections in Indiana, as in any State, whether they had a registry law or no registry law. Our fundamental law is good enough on this question. The builders of railroads, the workingmen who rent, are the ones who will be injured by such an amendment, and not the men who own their houses.
Mr. MITCHELL, felt it is a duty to offer objections to this proposed amendment. We should educate the morals of the people as one of the moss potent guards to the ballot-box. He opposed the 60 day residence clause because it would take the ballot out of the hands of the laboring class; and he also opposed the registry clause.
Mr. SHANKS spoke in favor of the amendment, answering objections, and thinking that the fairest ballot ever taken in Indiana was under the registry law.
Mr. 0VERMEYER insisted there ought not to be any politics in this question. We are not the tribunal to try this question. It should rest with the people to say will they put these words in the constitution. He was willing to risk the people. Under this amendment but a small number would lose their residence.
Mr. ALLEN was for this amendment, because it fixes a residence.
Mr. March [one of the framers of the present constitutions] favored submitting this amendment to the vote of the people.
Mr. BRIGGS demanded the previous question, which was seconded, by the House, and, under its operation the amendment was adopted by yeas 60, nays 34.
Pending the roll call--
Mr. Davidson announced his pair with Mr. Van Valzah, who had been called to the depot.
Mr. Edwins, when his name was called, said: Believing our action was not final, and that this question should go to the people, voted "aye."
Mr. Lehman, in explanation, and willing to trust this question with the people, would vote "aye."
Mr. Scholl, when his name was called, said: If wrong his people would correct him. He voted "aye."
Mr. Schwitzer, explaining, said: He was home recently,and his constituents instructed him to vote against this amendment.
Mr. Van Pelt, when his name was called, believing this amendment would deprive many of the privilege of the ballot, would vote "no."
Mr. Works, when his name was called in explanation said : Believing his constituents were competent to determine the question for themselves voted "aye."
The vote was then announced as above recorded.
And then the house adjourned.
The Senate met pursuant, to adjournment--Lieutenant Governor GRAY in the chair.
The session was opened with prayer by Rev. Jacob Rothwilder, of the German M. E. church, of this city.
Several dozen reports were made from the standing committees, which were placed on the files without, reading, under an order by the presiding o nicer.
Mr. SARNlGHAUSEN,from the
Mr. FOSTER, from the
Be it resolved by the Senate, the House concurring, that all laws in the order of their enactment, and as soon thereafter as practicable, be printed at the lowest possible cost, and in sufficient numbers to supply each clerk, auditor's office and bar association of this State with a copy thereof.
Mr. HARRIS moved to substitute for the words "lowest, possible cost" these words: "In the cheapest manner possible."
On motion the resolution was recommitted with instructions to amend so as to provide only for the printing of such laws as contained an emergency clause.
Mr. FOWLER offered the following:
Resolved, That the
It was referred to the
Bills for acts were introduced, read the first time, and severally referred to appropriate committees, as follows:
By Mr. SARNIGHAUSEN, [S. 300] to amend section 26 and 61 of the general city incorporation law of March 14,1867, so City Councils may take the county appraisement for taxes or order a special appraisement for one year or a number of years, not exceeding five years, and may order that the road labor tax not be worked out, but paid in cash.
By Mr. DONHAM [S. 301] to abolish the office of supervisor of highways--the county commissioners to appoint an overseer of roads from the county.
By Mr. WINTERBOTHAM, [S. 302] to divide the state into congressional districts,
By Mr. LEEPER, [S. 303] to amend section 1 of the voluntary fire or life association act of March 14, 1874.
By Mr. STREIGHT, [S. 304] providing for the appointment of a railroad commissioner by the governor.
By Mr. SHAFFER, [S. 305] to provide for the construction of fish ladders over dams, and the maintenance of the same. The bill is accompanied by a petition signed by over 1,000 citizens favoring its passage.
By Mr. STREIGHT, [S. 306] for the better protection of sheep, and to discourage the keeping of sheep-killing dogs.
By MENZIES, [S. 307] to amend section 784 of the general practice act of June, 1852; suit to commence within two years, damages not to exceed $10,000.
By Mr. KRAMER, [S. 308] to fix the rate for the annual publication of the delinquent tax lists.
By Mr. COMSTOCK,[S. 309] to allow admissions under eighteen years of age to the house of refuge.
By Mr FOWLER, [S. 310] to regulate conditional sales of personal property, and to provide for recording the terms of the conditions.
By Mr. POINDEXTEB, by request, [S. 311] to abolish the state normal school.
By Mr. WILSON, [S. 312] to authorize the appointment of a commissioner of fisheries for the state of Indiana, by the governor.
And then came the recess till 2 o'clock p. m.
By Mr. TRAYLOR, [S. 313] to legalize sheriff's, administrator's, guardian's and commissioners'sales, made in pursuance of notice having been printed in the English language in newspapers published in the German language.
By Mr. LANGDON, [S. 314] by request, to amend section 28 of the plank macadamized road act of May 12,1852.
The LIEUTENANT GOVERNOR announced the special order for this hour being the consideration of the bill [S. 158--Mr. Harris'] concerning married women--removing all legal disabilities--the same as if she were single.
Mr. REEVE moved to amend section 7 so that the husband shall not make repairs or improvements upon the property of his wife without her consent in writing, delivered to the contractor or person making the improvements. Unless there be some way to preserve her objection it will be impossible for her to show that objection. Sooner or later we must come to the principles embodied in this bill, and the sooner the better.
Mr. HARRIS: The amendment will have to be written to meet the object of its author. There are men in this city who think whatever they may acquire, if not in direct violation of the criminal code. Is all right; and they have wives who aid and abet them in the way of getting improvements on the property of the wife and never paying for them. Usually the wife will protect her own interest; but in the interest of even handed justice this provision ought to stand as it is in the bill. It she don't want the improvement she can say so to the workmen, and then her property will not be chargeable.
Mr. LANGDON: How far we shall go in advancing the separate interests of married women is a serious question. There is no justice or common sense in some of the provisions of this bill. It would start a controversy at the hearthstone, where it is the policy of law to keep peace and quiet. Would you go into the courts of justice with a controversy between husband and wife? Unless the husband has her authority he ought not to bind his wife's property; and to preclude controversy the authority ought to be put down in writing.
Mr. REEVE: If senators can find a laboring man, that, during life time, is deserving of more pity or commiseration than the average wife, they can find what he has not yet dis- covered. If Use balance of the bill be of any consequence, moist certainly this amendment should be made. It is an easy matter for a laboring man to ask for the written consent of the wife before making improvements on her property.
Mr. BURRELL cited reasons why the amendment should be adopted. He would favor such an agency as would be a matter of record.
Mr. OLDS moved to amend section one by inserting after the words "personal property" the words 'in certain cases,' with a view to follow this amendment with others to carry his idea through the bill.
Mr. HARRIS--The amendment would make nonsense of the section.
The amendment was rejected.
Mr. COMSTOCK moved to amend section two so it will read as follows:
A married woman may carry on any trade or business and perform any labor or service on her sole and separate account. The earnings and profits of any married woman accruing from her trade, business, services or labor, other than labor for her husband or family, shall be her sole and separate property.
Mr. MENZIES favored this amendment because the language in the bill is capable of different interpretations. Every law should be free From any ambiguity or doubt.
Mr. BURRELL moved to amend by striking out the words "other than labor for her husband and family."
Mr. REEVE: The amendment would make the wife a femme sole to all intents and purposes. Every movement towards separating husband and wife is attended with danger. They will adopt themselves to the inevitable. He urged senators to make no innovation that will tend to the destruction of the marital relation, but to make laws consistent and dignified.
The amendment, was rejected.
Mr. REEVE made a motion to reconsider the vote adopting the amendment [Mr. Comstock's.]
On motion by Mr. VIEHE this motion was laid on the table--yeas 36, nays 10.
Mr. OLDS offered a substitute for section 3, which was rejected.
Mr. HEFRON moved to amend section 3 by inserting the words "in writing" in lieu of the word "affirmatively." We are treading upon holy ground in attempting to define the legal rights of husband and wife.
It was agreed to upon a division--affirmative 24, negative 15.
Mr. BRISCOE moved to strike from section 3 these words; "And unless her husband con- sent thereto affirmatively and make use of such property and its proceeds, he shall in no wise be held liable for any debt so contracted by her."
The motion was agreed to upon a division--affirmative 24, negative 14.
Mr. COMSTOCK moved the following as a substitute for section 7: "Whenever The husband causes repairs or improvements to be made on the real property of the wife with her knowledge and consent thereto in writing delivered to the contractor or person performing the labor or furnishing the material, she shall alone be liable for material furnished or labor performed."
It was adopted.
Mr. REEVE proposed an additional section declaring all transfers of property made by the husband to the wife, when he is indebted to any other person, he being otherwise insolvent, to be null and void.
It was rejected.
The nine sections, as amended, were adopted as a whole, and the bill ordered engrossed for the third reading.
And then the Senate adjourned.
The House was called to order by the speaker, and prayer was ordered by Elder BLOUNT, pastor of the Christian church of Wabash.
The reading of the journal was proceeded with, until--
On the motion of Mr. EDWINS, the further reading was dispensed with.
On the motion of Mr. OSBORNE of Elkhart the
The SPEAKER then announced the order pending the adjournment last night the
consideration of enrolled Senate joint resolution No. 2, proposing amendment to section
5, arti-[cle]
The clerk then read enrolled Senate joint resolution, No. 3, proposing amendment to section 14 of article 2 of the constitution.
Mr. TAYLOR of Daviess: The only reason why we desire a change is that we may better ourselves. The reasons for this change is to purify elections, but can it be reached by this section? He think not. It would be well for the State, if the elections could be held in November. If the language here was "may" instead of "shall" [provide for the registration, etc.] he would give it his support. In no case can a registry law tend to purify our elections. Dead men's names are used to perpetrate fraud in the East where registry laws are in operation. Let us purity the elective franchise as much as possible; but he did not think it could be done under a registry law, and was therefore opposed to it.
Mr. WORKS was opposed to this proposed amendment, but in the light he now had was in favor of a registry law. He was also opposed to force this matter upon subsequent legislatures. He would vote against it.
Mr. SPEAKER CAUTHORN (Mr. Faulkner in the chair) thought this too serious a matter to make a political question of. The constitution wisely provides that no change can be made in that instrument except by a vote of the people. He did not think that this House ought to object to this amendment going before the people. It has been intimated that it might injure some political party. If it had the effect to bury any political party he was willing to see that party buried. No one could go farther than. He was willing to go for the protection of the ballot. The only question now is, will we change the election from October to November? He hoped the resolution would pass.
Mr. BRIGGS had no use for a registry law. He thought there could be but one construction put upon the resolution. It had been clearly decided that the word "shall" in the constitution means "shall;" but in the statutes can be interpreted "shall" or "may." He should vote against the resolution, but he did not want it understood that in voting against this proposed amendment he wanted to throttle the people. He was in favor of uniting the two elections. If he thought the people would indorse these proposed amendments he would not put himself in their way,
Mr. SAINT said he opposed the resolution yesterday conscientiously, and by passing this we did not provide for a special election. The question is whether or not we are willing to consolidate the October and November elections.
Mr. GORDON said in order to get a judiciary separated as far as possible from politics and state matters from national politics, he would vote for this resolution.
Mr. MIERS was opposed to separating the election of judges from the general election for fear of running the matter still deeper into politics. If it provides for registration, and if it can not be determined whether it calls for a registry law or not he would oppose it.
Mr. HESS was in favor of the proposed amendment, because it will cut off the expense of one of the elections. He also favored a registry law.
Mr. PERRY voted against the resolution because it compelled a registry law, and because members of the legal profession in the House were not agreed as to what the resolution did require.
Mr. SLEETH said: The principle objection to this amendment evidently arises from a difference of opinion, as to its true meaning, Some insist that the last clause of the proviso makes a registry law mandatory for all elections, others insist that: it only applies to the election of judges in case their election should be made special by the Legislature. When we apply to this amendment the well settled rules of legal construction applicable to such instruments there can be no doubt of its meaning.
1. It is an old and well established rule of legal construction that words of limitation placed in a proviso rebates to and limits the main proposition introduced by the proviso of which they are a part, and not to the provisions of the instruments preceding the proviso. Now in this case the proviso introduces the grant of power to the Legislature to provide special elections for judges, with the condition that it shall also provide for the registration of voters. No lawyer will question the correctness or the application of the rule to this amendment; therefore the registration will and can only apply to special elections for judges, in case we shall have any. Another equally well established role of construction is that you must look to the whole instrument in order to construct a particular part thereof, and that one portion shall be construed in the light of other portions, so that the whole may express the sense of the framer. Now, in the first amendment considered yesterday we provided-for all general elections, and left the subject of registration discretionary with the Legislature. Now, is it possible that a court, in construing these two amendments, shall say that the Legislature yesterday made registration only permissive and to-day mskes it mandatory, as applied to all elections? Would it not be compelled, under all rules of construction, to say they intended the one for general elections, to which provisions it is attached, and the other for special elections of judges, to which it alone relates? There can be no doubt as to the meaning of this amendment.
Under the demand for the previous question the House of Representatives passed the resolution--yeas 61, nays 34--as follows:
Yeas--Messrs. Allan, Arnold of Grant and Blackford, Arnold of Wabash, Baker of Tippecanoe, Bearss, Brown of Jasper, Brown of Steuben, Carey, Carter, Conway, Connor, Connor, Copeland, Davidson, Davis, Donnell, Edwins, English, Fancher, Ginz, Golden, Gordon, Hartland, Hart, Herod, Hess, Hopkins, Hubbard, Humphreys, Huthsteiner, Kelly, Kirkpatriek, Lehman, Lindley, Major, March, Messick, Osborn of Elkhart, Osborn of Vermillion, Overmeyer, Owen, Reed, Robeson, Rodman, Robeson, Saint, Scholl, Shanks, Shauck,Shutt, Skinner, Sleeth, Snoddy, Stevens, Taylor of Lagrange, Taylor of Warrick, Thayer, Thayer, Thornburg, Vanpelt, Vawter, Watson, Wimmer. Mr. Speaker--61.
Nays--Messrs. Alden, Barker of Pike, Briggs, Bryant, Caldwell, Compton, Confer, Cunningham, Dailey, Dalton, Drake, Drover, Faulkner, Flodder, Galbraith, Garoutte, Handy, Hosmer, Kester, Miers, Mitchell, Nave, Perry, Reicheldafer, Rooker, Schweitzer, Shields, Stucker, Taylor of Daviess, Thompson, Tulley, Van Valzah, Willard, Works--34.
Mr. STUCKER, explaining, when his name was called, said: Mr. Speaker, having been cut off both yesterday and to-day by the previous question, I now desire to explain my vote on the first and third amendments. On the first I voted "no." In my Judgment 60 days is too long for residence in the township, but I care little for residence. I am satisfied that the registration laws will not affect fraud until the system of buying and selling votes is stopped, but will increase that infamous crime.
Then the probability is that an election will
The vote was then announced as above. So the resolution was adopted.
Then came the recess till 2 o'clock p. m.
The SPEAKER resumed the chair, and announced the first thing in order to be Senate joint resolution No 4, proposing amendment to sections 4 and 5 of article 4 of the constitution, printed on page 161 of the acts of the regular session of 1877.
The proposed amendment passed the House of Representatives by yeas 86, nays 3.
Th speaker then ordered the clerk to read Senate joint resolution No. 5, proposing amendment to the 14th clause of section 22 of article 4 of the constitution.
Mr. OSBORNE of Elkhart doubted the propriety of voting for this proposition, nor did he think it the correct, one to embrace in our constitution. If this resolution should pass he did not see what would prevent the party in power from grading fees and salaries in counties where the minority were in power so as to cripple the efficiency of its officers. It ought not to pass.
Mr. BRIGGS said there was a cry from all parts of the senate that the Legislature ought to have the power to reduce fees and salaries and this will give them the power. He believed this to be the right position and the people ought to vote upon it.
Mr. SCHWEITZER said he was in favor of the proposed amendment. His constituents have instructed him upon this subject and he was not going to treat them slightly. He was in favor of the resolution.
Mr. MARCH don't understand that this will give the Legislature power to discriminate in politics, but the rule must be the same in one county as another. He was for the resolution.
Under the operation of the previous question, demanded by Mr. LEHMAN, the resolution passed the House of Representatives by yeas 91, nays 1.
The House then proceeded to the consideration of the Senate joint resolution proposing to amend the second section of Act seven of the constitution as printed on page 162-3 of acts of 1877.
Mr. HESS did not think the House ought to come to a vote without some discussion on this point. He was opposed to the increase of the judges, and he had been informed by one of them recently, that the proposed amendment would not give the relief desired.
Mr. CALDWELL said: Having already devoted much time to the discussion or these resolutions, and about, one-third of the time of the session has expired, he demanded the previous question.
Under the operation of the previous question the resolution was rejected by--yeas 26, nays 69.
Senate joint resolution No. 9, proposing to strike out all the sections of the 13th article of the constitution and insert new matter, printed on page 85 of the acts of the special session of 1877, coming up--
Mr. ALLEN of Putnam said, If the whole State of Indiana was one incorporated city,I would vote this resolution, but as it is not. I must vote against it. He did not think the people should be called to vote upon a question they know but little about. The men who did not live in incorporated towns or cities were not the judges of what was necessary for those living in towns or cities. A large class were not interested in it at all.
Mr. BRIGGS thought it effected each voter in Indiana, and the people ought to have a chance to vote on it. He was in favor of it.
The resolution passed the House of Representatives by yeas 81, nays 11.
The House then proceeded to the consideration of joint resolution S. 19,for an amendment to section 29 of article 4 of the constitution to admit of a longer session of the General Assembly, printed on page 166 of the acts of the regular session of 1877.
Mr. OSBORNE of Elkhart said he came here in favor of this amendment, but had changed his mind. If the sessions should be prolonged for 120 days, he did not believe they would be any better off. The resolution ought not to pass.
The resolution was rejected by--yeas 23, nays 71.
The following enrolled Senate bills were read the first time and passed to the second reading:
The bill [S. 30] to authorize guardians to settle the estate of deceased wards.
The bill [S. 58] concerning prisoners in jail.
The bill [S. 71] to authorize justices of the peace to require additional replevin bail in cases where an insufficient bail has been taken,
The bill [S. 101] to repeal the act to authorize cities and towns to construct water works.
The bill [S. 125] providing for the punishment of persons in possession of stolen property.
The bill [S. 192] to amend section 468 of the practice act.
The senate concurrent resolution authorizing the auditor to draw his warrant to pay for revised statutes furnished by the librarian for the use of senators, coming up in order--
On the motion of Mr. OVERMEYER the resolution was ordered to be returned to the senate, with the statement that members of the House had refund to vote the statutes to themselves, and respectfully declined to concur in the resolution.
Mr. SHIELDS offered a resolution, which was adopted, requesting the State auditor to inform the House whether telegraph companies had been taxed, and if any had refused to pay, or if suits were pending against such companies, etc.
Bills for acts were introduced, read the first time and passed to the second reading, to-wit:
By Mr. SHANKS, [H. R. 389] to exempt property from sale on execution in certain cases.
By Mr. BAKER, [H. R. 390] to legalize the April election of 1878.
Mr. LEHMAN entered a motion to reconsider the vote by which the concurrent resolution of the Senate to pay for Revised Statutes furnished Senators was ordered returned to that body.
The House then adjourned.
The Senate was called, to order by the senator from Jackson (Mr. Burrell,) who was requested by the lieutenant governor to occupy the chair this morning.
The session was opened with prayer by Rev. VIRGIL K. TEVIS, of the M. E. church of this city.
The secretary's minutes of yesterday's proceedings were read, corrected and approved.
Mr. MENZIES offered The following:
Resolved by the Senate, the House of Representatives concurring, that the pay of the pages on duty in the Senate chamber be at the rate of $2 per day, commencing from the day their duty commenced.
The resolution on was adopted.
Mr. SARNIGHAUSEN presented a remonstrance signed by almost ail the members of the bar of Allen county against the passage of the bill to abolish the criminal court in Allen county.
On motion it was ordered, that when the 'Senate adjourn it be till Monday at a quarter before 2 o'clock, p. m.
The PRESIDING OFFICER laid before the Senate a communication from the superintendent
of public instruction in answer to a resolution of the Senate inquiring as to what
extent the local school levies can be reduced without injury to the public schools, in
which he states that he does not know of a single corporation which levies the full
amount of taxation for school purposes now permitted by law. After a careful examination
he is satisfied that the following reductions in the possible levy for school purposes
can be made without seriously impairing the efficiency of the schools, viz: I. The tax
for the erection of school houses, etc., to be levied by civil trustees of incorporated
towns only, which is 30 cents on the $100. 2. He thinks it would be safe to reduce the
limitation on the possible issue of bonds by the civil authorities of cities and towns
for school buildings from $50,000 to $25,000, and to reduce the tax that may be levied
for the payment of principal and Interest on these bonds from 50 cents on the $100 and
$1.00 on each poll, to 15 cents on the $100 and 50 cents on each poll. 3. He thinks the
local tax for school purposes commonly called "tuition tax" of 25 cents on the $100 and
25 cents on each poll, which can be levied only by civil authorities, and not by school
trustees, can be reduced to 20 cents on the $100. and 25 cents on each poll. 4. If some
provision could be made by which a tax could be levied on those corporations only in
which debts have been already contracted, he thinks that the levy of 50 cents on the
$100 and $1 on each poll, for the purpose of providing school houses, furniture,
apparatus, fuel and other necessary expenses, except tuition, which can be levied by
school trustees of townships, towns and cities, could be reduced to 35 cents on each
$100, and 50 cents on each poll. This will effect a reduction in the possible levy in
townships of twenty-six per cent., in cities of thirty six per cent, and in towns of
fifty-four per cent., without serious injury to the schools. The communication was
referred to the
Mr. LEEPER offered the following:
Whereas, The Indiana Hospital for the Insane was, according to the language of the state, established for "the cure of the Insane of Indiana;" and,
Whereas, From reports in the public prints, it appears that certain persons, not adjudged insane according to the statutes in such cases made and provided, have been harbored as inmates of such institution for a considerable length of time; therefore,
Resolved, That the
It was adopted.
The following described bills for acts were introduced, read the first time and referred to appropriate committees:
By Mr. KENT [S. 315], to authorize the county commissioners of the several counties in this State to purchase the books, stationery and other articles for the several county offices, and for the conduct of public business.
By Mr. REEVE, by request, [S. 316], to amend section 7 of the act of June 9, 1852, providing for appointment of notaries public, by adding these words: "and all official acts performed by any such person as a notary snail be absolutely void."
By Mr. KAGAN, [S. 317], to prohibit railway companies from transporting free, or at any less rate of fare than is charged the public generally, any member of the General Assembly, or any judicial, county or district officer of this State.
By Mr. HARRIS, [S. 318] defining certain misdemeanors. Any person who, without authority, shall be found in or upon any railroad car, or remove any seal or lock therefrom. Justices of the peace to have power to punish by fine or imprisonment.
By Mr. TAYLOR, [S. 319] to amend the act providing for the election of justices of the peace, so that there shall be but one in each township, one in addition for each incorporated town, and one in addition for every 2,000 voters or traction thereof in each city at the last preceding general election.
By Mr. HEFRON, [S. 320] authorizing the election of marshals of cities by the common council thereof, for the term of two years.
By Mr. SARNIGHAUSEN, [S. 321] to amend section 2 of the act of March 17,1875, in relation to the laying out, opening, widening, altering and vacation of streets, alleys and highways, and for straightening or altering water courses by cities--prescribing the duties of city commissioners.
By Mr. GARRIGUS, for Mr. KAHLO, [S. 322] to legalize acts of the local authorities in aid of the erection of a school building in Monticello, White county.
By Mr. STREIGHT,[S. 323] to amend the act to discourage the keeping of useless and sheep-killing dogs by imposing a tax of $1 for a male and $2 for a female dog, weighing ten pounds or under, and $3 each for a male or female dog weighing over ten pounds, and for each dog more than one $5 each.
By Mr. FOWLER, [S. 324] to amend section 244 of the general practice act of 1852. The party producing a witness "either in a civil or criminal action," shall not be allowed to impeach his credit.
The Senate adjourned till Monday at a quarter before 2 o'clock p. m.
The SPEAKER called the House to order, and announced that the session would be opened this morning with prayer by the representative from Orange county (Mr. Hubbard).
The clerk's journal was read until--
On the motion of Mr. SLEETH, the further reading was dispensed with.
The SPEAKER announced the special order for this hour, being the following resolution, heretofore offered by Mr. Osborne, of Elkhart.
Resolved by the House of Representatives, the Senate concurring, That on the ----- day of -----, 1879, the two houses will proceed by concurrent vote to elect the following officers, to-wit: One president of the several boards of trustees and commissioners of the benevolent institutions of the State, two commissioners for the Hospital for the Insane, two trustees from the Asylum for the Blind, and two trustees for the institution for the education of the deaf and dumb. That at 11 o' clock a.m. of said day the two houses will take the first ballot for the first of said officers in the order above named, and the result of such ballot shall be immediately communicated by each House fail to concur or agree in giving to the same person a majority of the votes cast in each House, then succeeding ballots shall, in like manner, be taken, and the result be communicated by each House to the other until ten ballots shall have been taken, unless the two Houses shall have sooner concurred or agreed in giving to the same person a majority of the votes cast in each House, but if no person shall have received a majority of the votes cast in each House upon either of said ten ballots, then another ballet and further ballots if necessary shall be concurrently taken by each House, and the person receiving a majority of the votes cast in both Houses shall be by such vote elected to said office, and the result of the ballot shall be communicated by each House to the other, and said person shall be declared elected in each House, and such declaration and communication shall be spread upon the journals of each House and the two Houses shall concurrently proceed in like manner to elect each of the said other officers in the order above named,and shall transact no other business until all of said officers are elected, unless by a concurrent vote of each House the further continuance of the election be postponed.
Mr. SLEETH inasmuch as this is not a political question, and as the
Mr. WORKS moved to amend by referring the resolution to the
Mr. SLEETH accepted the amendment.
Mr. MIERS did not think the time of this House or the committee ought to be taken up in further considering the matter. The session is far spent already, and he thought every member had his mind made up to go upon the record.
Mr. GORDON wanted more time; he hoped the motion now before the House would prevail.
The yeas and nays being demanded and taken, resulted--yeas 41, nays 44.
So the motion to refer was rejected.
Pending the roll call--
Mr. SLEETH, in explanation of his vote, said: "I am compelled to vote for the
reference, because this House, by a resolution, some time ago instructed the
Mr. Thompson, in explanation of his vote, said: I wish to say that, I am a member of
the
Mr. OSBORNE of Elkhart explaining, said: He had not the remotest idea that this
resolution would bring out such remarks from the gentleman from Rush (Mr. Sleeth). The
facts were that the subject matter had been brought before the committee, and they were
unwilling to express any opinion upon it without more time to investigate than they had
at their command, and the chairman so reported to the House. He thought it unfortunate
to be charged with injustice when it was the farthest thought from him, either as member
of this House or chairman of the
Mr. WORKS, when his name was called, explaining, said: There seems to be a misunderstanding here. He understood that the matter been before the committee and he thought they were anxious for an opportunity to further consider it. It was for this reason that he made the motion to refer.
So the motion was rejected, as above recorded.
The question recurring upon the passage of the resolution--
Mr. OVERMEYER said: If we pass this resolution we declare that the election of a president of the boards, and one trustee for each of said asylums in 1877, was illegal. In 1877 these officers were elected by the House and Senate sitting together, but the vote was taken by each house separately, and no wrong was done to any one. The law was substantially complied with. In 1875, when the Legislature was under Democratic control, these elections were had in the same manner as in 1877, and in 1873 the same way. In 1873 our honorable speaker and Governor Williams, then members of the Legislature, sanctioned the mode pursued in 1877, by their votes. And in 1873, Mr. Caldwell, Mr. Humphries and Mr. Davidson, now Democratic members of the House, sanctioned he same mode by helping to elect Democrats in the same way as the Republicans, now proposed to be ousted were elected. How can these worthy gentlemen now say that, it was not right to elect Democrats in 1875 and not right in the same way to elect Republicans in 1877?
A slight variation from the law will not vitiate an election. If there was no fraud and it was not possible that the result was affected by the failure to fully comply with the law, the election is none the less legal. The fact that Governor Williams declined to commission the officials elected in 1877 makes no difference. The governor's commission is not necessary to enable them to hold their offices. This point is squarely decided by our supreme court in 33 Ind. We ought, therefore, to vote down this resolution, or amend so as to provide for the election of but one trustee for each of said asylums.
Mr. BAILEY moved that the further consideration of the resolution be postponed until 2
o'clock on Monday. In the meantime the resolution be referred to the
The motion was agreed to.
The SPEAKER laid before the House a communication from the superintendent of public instruction, similar to the one described in the Senate proceedings this morning.
On motion by Mr. Watson 200 copies were ordered printed.
Mr. HERROD submitted the report of the special committee on the bill [H. R. 209] fixing the number and pay of employes, returned a substitute therefor, [H. R. 291] and recommending its passage. The report of the committee was considered in. The constitutional rule being suspended therefor, the bill was read the second time and passed to the third reading.
An ineffectual motion was made to suspend the constitutional rule in order to consider the bill engrossed that it might be read the third time and put upon its passage.
The House then took recess until 2 o'clock.
The following described bills for acts were introduced, read the first time and severally passed to the second reading:
By Mr. REICHELDAFER, [H. R. 392]for the organization of State militia--500 copies ordered printed.
By Mr. DAILEY, [H. R. 393] defining the crime of embezzlement and prescribing punishment therefor.
By Mr. CARTER, [H. R. 394] to repeal 11,14, 15, l6 and 17 sections of the act to
create a State normal school and acts supplementary thereto. Also a resolution,
which was adopted, requesting the
By Mr. STUCKER, [H. R. 395] to authorize county treasurers whose personal property
is offered for sale for taxes and not sold to
By Mr. CALDWELL, a concurrent resolution, which was adopted, allowing officers and employes to draw the same pay as at the last General Assembly. Also a bill [H. R. 396] defining the privilege of electors in this State where two or more members of the Legislature are to be chosen at one election.
By Mr. STEVENS, [H. R. 397] to require petitions petitioning for location, vacation or change of highways to give bond for costs in case the commissioners should report adversely.
By Mr. SHANKS, a resolution, which was adopted, that the committee on railroads inquire into the expediency of enacting a law that railways shall carry passengers and freight at certain maximum rates. Also, a bill [H. R. 398] to create the ------ circuit, convening the Ninth, Twenty-sixth and Twenty-eighth circuits. Also, by request, [H. R. 399] authorizing county boards to construct and purchase gravel, plank, or macadamized roads in certain cases, and make the same free on petition of majority of freeholders in the township.
By Mr. WILLARD, [H. R. 400] for the better preservation and protection of game--quail, or Virginia partridge--between the first days of January and November in each year. Also a bill [H. R. 401] to legalize the annexation of certain parcels of land to New Albany prior to the year 1856, and the acts of the Common Council of said city in relation thereto.
By Mr. ALLEN, [by consent--H. R. 402] to require petitions of property owners in the matter of improvement of streets or alleys in cities or towns. Also [H. R. 403] to amend section 5 of the act of March 7, 1877, to provide for more speedy trial of causes, etc.
By Mr. NAVE [H. R. 404] to amend section 124 of the general practice act, so that the sentence of death shall be carried out in an enclosure, but not in such a way as to debar the public from witnessing the execution.
By Mr. CAREY [H. R. 405] to amend section 3 of the liquor law of March 7,1875.
By Mr. DAVIDSON [H. R. 60--with a petition therefor from the Indiana Wool Growing association] to encourage sheep husbandry, declaring certain dogs nuisances, and providing for licensing the keeping of dogs--one dog, $5; each additional dog, $6.
By Mr. HUMPHREYS, [H. R. 407] repealing the act for the assessment and collection of taxes on dogs. Also, [H. R. 408] to provide for the election of a county school superintendent by the people. Also, [H. R. 409] declaring it unlawful for a person to call up another after he has retired for the night.
By Mr. CUNINGHAM, [H. R. 410] to amend section 2 of the supervisor of highway act.
By Mr. HUBBARD, [H. R. 411] to amend section 8 of the act amendatory of the plank, gravel and macadamized road law of February, 1855--so Central Plank road company shall pass free persons and teams connected with the public asylums of the State.
By Mr. HESS, [H. R. 412] to amend section 397 of the general practice act of June 18,1852. Also [H. R. 413] to amend section of the act of March 3, 1877, to amend section 7 of the building association act.
By Mr. BROWN, [H. R. 414] for the relief of Patrick Holliday.
By Mr. SHIELDS [H. R. 415] to regulate and license the sale of spirituous, malt and intoxicating liquors. Two hundred copies were ordered printed.
By Mr. THAYER [H. R. 416] giving circuit courts jurisdiction by affidavit (with information) over felonies. Also [H. R. 417] for the protection of keepers of inns and boarding house keepers--from the practise of fraud by their boarders.
By Mr. FANCHER., [H. R. 418] to amend sections 26 and 25 of the common school law, and providing for the election of county school superintendents.
By Mr. EDWINS, [H. R. 419] to legalize taxes for 1877 of the town of Elwood. Also,
[H. R. 420] for relief of Alexander
Nichols, a former trustee of Madison county, Indiana. Also, a resolution, which was
adopted, instructing the
By Mr. CONFER, [H. R. 421] to provide for the submission to the qualified voters of this State the proposed constitutional amendments.
By Mr. ROBINSON, [H. R. 422] to authorize county commissioners to declare abandoned gravel, plank or macadamized roads or bridges out of repair, and to purchase the same in certain cases.
By Mr. HEROD, [H. R. 423] to enable guardians to loan moneys of wards in certain cases.
By Mr. WORKS, [H. R.424] to amend section; 5, 6, 7, 8, 43, 44, 45 and 46 to divide the State into Judicial Circuits, Also [H. R. 425] making it the duty of the governor to appoint the State Librarian, Directors of Prisons North and South and Trustees of Benevolent Institutions and State Normal School. Also, [H. R. 426] providing by whom certain debts shall be paid. Also, [H. R. 627--by request] in relation to the duties, fees, etc., of persons engaged in the business of furnishing abstract of title.
By Mr. HUTHSTEINER, [H. R. 428] to amend sections one and two of the act
prescribing the duties of County Boards. Also [H. R. 429] to amend supplemental
section nine of the common school law--concerning institutes. Also, [H. R. 430] to
amend section two of act of March 31, '52 concerning County Auditors. Also a
resolution, which was adopted,compelling the
By Mr. FAULKNER, [H. R. 431] to provide for the appointment of a joint committee of Senate and House to investigate public expenditures--six from each house.
By Mr. SLEETH, [H. R. 432] to provide for for waiving and issuing service and civil actions and for voluntary appearance. Also [H. R. 433] for the protection of wild game and certain birds--unlawful to net, nap or destroy quail at any time, etc,
By Mr. SKINNER, [H. R. 434] providing for the redemption of real property sold on execution, etc.
By Mr. PERRY, [H. R. 435] legalizing the dissection of human bodies, providing for the manner of obtaining the same, etc.
By Mr. HOPKINS, [H. R. 436] to amend the act of June 17, 1852, concerning the organization of County Boards.
By Mr. BARKER, [H. R. 437] to authorize Trustees of townships or cities to purchase books for schools--not of a higher grade than fourth reader. Two hundred copies were ordered printed.
By Mr. TAYLOR, of Warrick, [H. R. 438] to authorize the various Boards of County
Commissioners to contract for the printing of
By Mr. MITCHELL, by request, [H. R. 439] to legalize certain sales and conveyances of title derived thereby.
By Mr. ARNOLD, a resolution, which was adopted, requiring all bills repolled from the committees with amendments be printed. Also a bill [H. R. 440] to authorize justices of the peace, in cities and towns where affidavit is filed for a State warrant, to require a bond for costs. Also a bill [H. R. 441] to amend the act to enable administrators to enforce a partition of real estate. Also [H. R. 442] to amend an amendatory act of the common school law--concerning transfers of scholars.
By Mr. OWEN, [H. R. 443] to amend section 1 of the act of March 11, 1875, concerning township trustee.
By Mr. TAYLOR of Daviess, [H. R. 444] in relation to defining warehouse receipts.
By Mr. ENGLISH, [H. R. 445] authorizing insurance companies to do business in the State of Indiana against accident or casualties. Also [H. R. 446] to establish a department of statistics in the department of State.
And then the House adjourned.
The session was opened with prayer by Rev. JOSEPH BRADFORD CLEAVER, of the Church of Christ, in the following words:
(Thou Father who art in the Heavens, we worship Thee as the God alike of nature and of nations; and, in the name of Jesus Christ, thy son, we thank thee for all the mercies and blessings of this present life, and we pray Thee that every one of us may have set up for his life. Thy standard of personal righteosusness. We pray that Thou wilt watch over the loved and absent ones; that Thou wilt judge between us when we are absent, one from another; that Thou wilt shield and defend us from temptation, and enable us to live the lives we now live in the flesh, by faith in the love of God, f0 that when the summons comes to call us hence we shall be prepared to receive it joyfully, and not with grief. We pray that the proceedings had in this present convention may be such as shall meet thine approval, through Jesus Christ our Lord. Amen.
The secretary's minutes of Saturday's proceedings were read and approved.
On the motion of Mr. STREIGHT the Senate proceeded to the consideration of bills on the second reading, to-wit:
The bill [S. 5.-Mr. Moore's] to legalize certain sheriff's sales when the notice was defective--where three publications in a newspaper has been made, was read the second time with a committee report recommending its infinite postponement.
Mr. MOORE'S constituents are especially interested in this bill, and he hoped the Senate would not concur in the report of the committee. There has been a number of sales made in his county defective in the giving: of printed notice three weeks successively, by publication in a newspaper--the sheriff construing the statutory provision to mean that three publications or insertions were sufficient, even though they may not be in three successive weeks. The Supreme court has decided such sales are absolutely void, but standard authorities will sustain the power of the Legislature to legalize such sales, and it would be entirely proper to do so. As the Senate is not full, he hoped the bill would be permitted to lie upon the table that, it may be considered by a full Senate. He made that motion.
The motion was agreed to.
The bill [S. 6--Mr. Sarnighausen's]to legalize the acknowledgments of all deeds, mortgages, etc., taken by notaries public after the expiration of their commission, was read the second time.
Mr. HARRIS moved to amend by adding in the proper place these words: "or who, being duly commissioned as notaries, but being ineligible to hold such office, exercised the functions thereof in good faith."
Mr. HARRIS felt that this bill can not injure any one, and that may be of great advantage to many in after-time, therefore, he favored its engrossment and passage.
Mr. REEVE cared very little about the bill, as it simply goes to the record of deeds and has no other effect, only to make it, subject to record. Still it may be well enough to pass it, as it is perfectly competent to make the record of a paper legal. Though the acknowledgment of an instrument can not be legalized, but, after being admitted to record by virtue of the illegal acknowledgment, it is perfectly competent to legalize the record.
Mr. DICE agreed with the senator from Marshall, [Mr. Reeve] that the amendment is not germane to the bill. We have no power to say a person ineligible to office shall execute the functions of such an office. Neither can we ratify the official acts of a person ineligible, He would favor the bill as introduced, but was opposed to the amendment.
Mr. BURRELL opposed both the bill and the amendment. We should not attempt to
legalize a thing the statute says is illegal. The bill attempts to legal something
that is absolutely void. Then he objected again, be cause this would be class
legislation--legislating to protect some certain individuals. Unless we could
legislate brains into some
Mr. WOOD thought any honest mistake ought to be legalized, and that the Legislature can legalize de facto acts of an official. As a question of fact nobody can be injured by this bill. The ablest man commit mistakes, but the people should not be permitted to suffer therefrom if the Legislature can prevent it.
Mr. BURRELL--If we resolve ourselves into a court to legalize the illegal acts of our neighbors the time would be entirely too short to get through with one single county. Our duty is to make law; the duty of the people is to obey. If we legalize everything, and do away with the courts, we would have a fine mess of business on our hands.
Mr. COMSTOCK--Unless we lay down the broad principle that every illegal act of every class of officers shall be legalized by the Legislature, we should stop somewhere. The same principle embodied in this bill would legalize the wrongful taking of property; and while this particular bill may not be productive of much, if any evil, but because of the principle embodied in it, he should oppose the bid.
Mr. LANGDON--Here is a question arising between the people of the State. This bill does not reach the question of validity of instruments acknowledged by notaries after the expiration of commissions, but as to whether the instrument is legally recorded. It is within the power of the Legislature to say the record evidence is good, for there is no vested right affected here, and this bill certainly ought to pass.
Mr. MENZIES--The Legislature has repeatedly passed acts of this character in order to prevent litigation on technicalities. They are called "curative acts." This class of bills are to prevent persons coming into courts 15 or 20 years after the act and taking advantage of a mere technicality.
Mr. BRISCOE demanded the previous question, which was seconded by the Senate, and under its operation thy amendment was agreed to and the bill ordered engrossed for third reading.
The bill [S. 7--Mr. Riley's] to prevent corruption at elections--making it unlawful, to contribute to any fund used to influence elections-- was read the second time and laid on the table because of the absence of the author.
The bill [S. 8--Mr. Sarnighausen's]to prevent grave robbing and the disturbance of graves, and the stealing of dead human bodies not buried--punishable by fine not exceeding $2,000, and imprisonment in the penitentiary not less than one year--accessories to be punished in like manner--was read the second time, a committee report recommending that the bill lie on the table.
The report was concurred in.
The bill [S. 9--Mr. Sarnighausen's] to promote the science of medicine and surgery, and providing humans subjects for anatomical and scientific dissection--any person dying in any prison or public asylum and remaining unclaimed for 24 hours after, or any vagrant found dead, or any person killed while committing a felony, or while attempting to escape from the officers of the law, having no husband or wife, father or mother, son or daughter, brother and sister--was read the second time.
Mr. SARNIGHAUSEN: The crime of grave robbing has increased very much during the past year--in his own county there have been some 12 or 15 cases; and it would seem absolutely necessary that some measure of this kind should be adopted.
Mr. FOWLER, regarding this as a very important measure, and desiring further time for its consideration, moved to lay the bill on the table.
The motion was rejected.
The report of the committee with amendments were concurred in.
Mr. HEFRON moved to strike out the words "shall be held and deemed to be public property" after the words "such body."
Mr. STREIGHT moved to add to section 1 a proviso, "that when any person shall express a wish to be buried, the dead body of such person shall not be delivered for dissection, but shall be properly buried."
Mr. COMSTOCK moved ineffectually to strike out "24" and insert "48 hours after death."
Mr. DICE moved to strike from section two the words "or Medical Associations." He thought when the State provides anatomical subjects for medical colleges, that was enough.
Mr. MENZIES did not suppose it would make any difference to the dead whether a college or an association shall dissect to the body. These words were put in the bid to cure the evils of grave robbing, and these medical associations have been much complained of as have been medical colleges. These are but four or five places in the State having colleges, and unless these words remain, but few localities would be benefitted by the bill
Mr. SHAFER: Medical schools are not the only places where dissection is carried on. In every county it is almost absolutely necessary for the local physicians to have anatomical subjects, and if they have to send to medical colleges for material it will revive the old practices of obtaining subjects; therefore he opposed the amendments.
Mr. WOOD opposed making a place in every county for the cutting up of human bodies. It would keep the community in a state of turmoil and excitement all the time. This is a delicate subject. He favored granting every facility of this kind to medical colleges, but opposed this thing of allowing the cutting up of dead bodies in every county, under sanction of law. For the sake of the public peace this bill ought not to pass as it stands.
Mr. RAGAN also favored line amendment.
Mr. REEVE thought the question presented in this amendment was one of expediency only. If these societies can not get subjects in a legitimate way they will--purchase them. They will send for a leg or an arm, or any part they may want. They will send to where they are for sale. The immediate effect of this amendment would be that dead bodies would be kept in pickle by medical colleges to be sold as demanded. How many people know when a person dies in the poor house? Not one in 10,000. It would be injudicious to adopt the amendment.
The amendment was rejected.
On motion by Mr. BRISCOE the words in section 2 "and becoming as aforesaid, public property," [referring to the dead body] were stricken out.
Mr. URMSTON moved to insert in line 8, section 2, after the word "college," the words "or medical association."
The years and nays were demanded on this amendment, but being ordered and taken resulted--yeas 29 nays 4.
No quorum voting--
On motion by Mr. LEEPER a call of the Senate was ordered, and being taken discovered 33 senators present and answering to their names.
Mr. BRISCOE made an ineffectual motion to adjourn.
Mr. HEFRON moved that the absentees be sent for.
The motion was rejected.
On motion by Mr. HARRIS further proceedings under the call were dispensed with and then--
The Senate adjourned.
The SPEAKER cabled the House to order and the reading of the journal of Saturday's proceedings until on the motion of Mr. Watson, the further reading was dispensed with.
The SPEAKER then said the House would take up bills on the second reading.
The following bills were read the second time and referred to appropriate committees unless otherwise stated:
The bill [H. R. 313-Mr. Shut's] for the listing of personal property.
Mr. Willard's bill, [H. R. 344] fixing fees and salaries.
Mr. Brown's bill [H. R. 345] for the incorporation of towns.
Mr. Lehman's bill,[H. R. 346] to authorize the sale of real estate belonging to the state.
Mr. Gordon's bill, [H. R. 347) defining defamation. Also, his bill [H. R. 348] to amend the general practice act. Also, his bill [H. R. 349] defining felony. Also, his bill [H. R. 350] to abolish the criminal court in Marion county.
Mr. Herod's bill, [H. R. 351] authorizing justices of the peace to appoint a Substitute.
Mr. Robinson's bill, [H.R 352] for the relief of mortgagors in certain cases.
Mr. Kelley's bill, [H. R. 353] defining a legal newspaper.
Mr. Watson's bill, [H. R. 354] for a uniform assessment of taxes.
Mr.Seeth's bill, [H. R. 355] defining verbal slander.
Mr. Vanpelt's bill, [H. R. 356] to the election and qualification of justices of the peace.
Mr. Galoutte's bill, [H. R. 357] to amend the common school law.
Mr. Taylor's of Warrick bill, [H. R. 358] relating to tramps.
Mr. Campbell's bill, [H. R. 359] defining tippling houses.
Mr. Schwitzer's bill, [H. R. 360] regulating complaints in bastardy.
Mr. Schwitzer's bill, [H. R. 361] to repeal the act for a general system of common schools. Also his bill, [H. R. 362] regulating the sale of intoxicating liquors. Also his bill, [H. R. 363] to regulate the practice of dentistry.
The bill, [H. R. 364] from the
Mr. Campbell's bill, [H. R. 365] to protect public nigh ways and ditches.
Mr. Hart's bill, [H. R. 366] to reduce the salaries of the members or the General Assembly.
Mr. Donnell's bill, [H. R. 367] to limit the number of justices of the peace, and increase their jurisdiction.
Mr. Carey's bill [H. R. 368] for the relief of the sureties of Jos, D. Bearley, defaulting trustee.
Mr. Humphrey's bill [H. R. 369] for a uniform assessment of taxes; also, to amend the general practice act.
Mr. Handy's bill [H. R.371] creating the Forty-third Judicial circuit.
Mr. Cunningham's bill [H. R. 372] to amend the common school law.
Mr. Wimmer's bill [H. R. 373] in relation to tresspassing animals.
Mr. Overmeyer's bill [H. R. 374] to amend the act in relation to county auditors; also, his bill [H. R. 375] concerning parties to action.
Mr. Taylor's of Lagrange bill [H. R. 376] defining certain misdemeanors.
Mr. Gordon's bill [H. R. 378] supplemental to an act defining misdemeanors.
Mr. Miers' bill, [H. R. 379] to prevent railroad accidents.
Mr. Gordon's bill, [H. R. 380] regulating foreign insurance companies.
Mr. Nave's bill, [H. R. 381] to repeal all laws for the incorporation of towns and cities.
Mr. Reed's bill, [H. R. 382] to amend the common school law.
Mr. Kirkpatrick's bill, [H. R. 383] to legalize the Kokomo gas light and coke company.
Mr. Major's bill, [H. R. 384] for the protection of fish.
Mr. Miers' bill, [H. R. 385] to discourage the keeping of useless and sheep killing dogs.
Mr. Miers' bill, [H. R. 386] to exempt growing crops from sale on execution until the same shall have matured.
Mr. Rodman's bill, [H. R. 387] to amend the general practice act; also his bill, [H. R. 388] to divide the public highways among the owners of land.
Mr. Shank's bill, [H. R. 389] to prevent property from sale on execution in certain cases.
Mr. Baker's bill, [H. R. 390] to legalize the April elections of 1878.
Mr. Herod's bill [H. R. 391] from the special committee thereon fixing the compensation and number of employes,
Mr. Reicheldafer's [H. R. 392] for the organization of the State militia.
Mr. Dailey's bill [H. R. 393] defining embezzlement.
Mr. Carter's bill [H. R. 394] to amend the act creating the State Normal School.
Mr. Stucker's bill [H. R. 395], County treasurers may remove property levied on for taxes to the county seat, and alter advertisement sell.
Mr. Caldwell's bill [H. R. 396] defining the privilege of electors.
Mr. Stevens' bill [H. R. 397] for the location, change, or vacation of highways.
Mr Shank's bill [H. R. 398] to create the ----- circuit--convening the 9th, 29th and 28th circuit.
Mr. Shank's bill, [H. R. 399] boards of county commissioners may construct gravel roads, etc.
Mr. Willard's bill, [H. R. 400] for the better protection of game. Also, his bill [H. R. 401] to legalize the annexation of certain lands to New Albany.
Mr. Allen's bill, [H. R. 402] for the improvement of streets and alleys. Also, his bill [H. R. 403] for the more speedy trial of causes.
Mr. Nave's bill, [H. R. 404] executions by hanging may be made public.
Mr. Arnold's, of Blackford, [H. R. 405] to amend the liquor law.
Mr. Davidson's bill, [H. R. 406] to encourage sheep husbandry.
Mr. Humphrey's bill, [H. R. 407] for taxes on dogs. Also, his bill [H. R. 408] for the election of county school superintendent. Also, his bill [H. R. 409] declaring it unlawful for persons to call up another after he has retired for the night.
Mr. Cunningham's bill [H. R. 410] to amend the supervisor's act.
Mr. Hubbard's bill [H. R. 411] amendatory of the plank, macadamized and gravel road law.
Mr. Hess' bill [H. R. 412] to amend the general practice act.
Mr. Hess' bill [H. R. 413] to amend the building association act.
Mr. Brown's bill [H. R. 414] for the relief of Patrick Holiday.
Mr. Thayer's bill [H. R. 416] giving circuit
Mr. Fancher's bill [H. R. 418] to amend the common school law.
Mr. Edwins' bill [H. R. 419] to legalize the taxes for 1877 of the town of Elwood: also, his bill [H. R. 420] for the relief of Alexander Nichols.
Mr. Conner's bill [H. R. 421] to submit the institutional amendments to the people.
Mr. Robinson's bill, [H. R. 422] authorizing county commissioners to declare abandoned gravel, plank or macadamized roads, or bridges out of repair to purchase the same.
Mr. Herod's bill, [H. R. 423] to enable guardians to loan money of wards in certain cases.
Mr. Work's bill, [H. R. 424] to divide the state into judicial circuits; also his bill, [H. R. 425] making it the duty of the governor to appoint the State librarian, directors of prisons North and South, and trustees of benevolent institutions and State normal school.
Mr. Works's bill [H. R. 426] providing by whom certain debts shall be paid; also his bill, [H. R. 427] in relation to the duties, fees, etc., of persons engaged in the business of furnishing abstracts of titles.
By Mr. Huthsteiner's bill [H. R. 428] to amend the act prescribing the duties of county boards; also his bill, [H. R. 429] for a supplemental section to the common school law.
Mr. Huthsteiner's bill, [H. R. 430] to amend section 2 of the act concerning county auditiors.
Mr. Faulkner's bill, [H. R. 431] for a joint committee to investigate public expenditures.
Mr. Sleeth's bill, [H. R. 432] to provide for waiving and issuing service in civil actions, and for voluntary appearance. Also his bill, [H. R. 433] for the protection of wild game.
Mr. Skinner's bill, [H. R. 434] providing for the redemption of real property sold on execution.
Mr. Perry's bill, [H. R. 435] legalizing the dissection of human bodies, and providing the manner of obtaining the same.
Mr. Hopkin's bill [H. R. 436] to amend the act concerning the organization of county Boards.
Mr. Taylor's of Warrick bill, [H. R. 438] authorizing the County Boards to contract for the printing, books, stationery, etc., for county officers.
Mr Mitchell's bill, [H. R. 439] to legalize certain sales and conveyances of title derived thereby.
Mr. Arnold's bill, [H. R. 440] to authorize justices of the peace in cities and towns where affidavit is filed for a state warrant to require a bond for costs. Also his bill, [H. R. 441] to enable administrators to enforce a partition of real estate. Also his bill, [H. R. 442] to amend the common school law.
Mr. Owen's bill, [H. R. 443] to amend the act concerning township trustees.
Mr.Taylor's,of Daviess, bill,[H. R. 444] defining warehouse receipts.
Mr. English's bill, [H. R. 445] authorizing Insurance companies to do business in the State. Also his bill, [H. R. 446] to establish a department of statistics in the department of state.
By Mr. BRIGGS, [H. R. 448] to amend the act to discourage the keeping of useless and sheep-killing dogs by making it the duty of township assessors to ascertain under oath or affirmation the number of dogs over the age six month, this kind, whether male or female.
By Mr. ENGLISH, [H. R. 449]to limit the power of cities having 30,000 inhabitants or more to contract for illuminating gas or for water--not for more than one year at a time.
By Mr. FANCHER, [H. R. 450] to prohibit the incorporation of the dissenting opinions of the judges of the supreme court of this State in the reports of said court.
By Mr. BROWN of Steuber, [H. R. 451] to repeal sections 1 and 2 and to amend section 3 of an act to provide for the regulation of the running at large of all kinds of animals within the different townships in the different counties of this State, and to provide for the taking up, impounding and soiling of such animals. Whenever they shall be found running at large any resident of the township may take up and impound said animals in any private or public pound in the State.
The House then took a recess until 2 o'clock p. m.
The SPEAKER resumed at 2 o'clock and announced the order--being the consideration of the House concurrent resolution fixing the time and manner of electing the trustees of the benevolent institutions of the State.
Mr. SAINT--by consent--introduced a bill [H. R. 452] for congressional apportionment, which was read the first time and passed to the second reading.
Mr. OSBORNE, from the
This report was signed by Messrs. Osborne, Taylor, Compton, Saint, Miers and Thompson, and states that the Fiftieth. General Assembly attempted to elect the president and one trustee for each of the institutions referred to in the resolution herewith returned to the House, but did not elect them by the concurrent vote of the two Houses, as the law required: and they now hold their offices by virtue of the law which enables them to hold over until their successors are elected and qualified. By the act of March 5,1859, the regular term of the presidents of the several boards expires April 2, 1879. It is claimed that one trustee for the Deaf and Dumb Asylum, one for the Blind Asylum, and one commissioner for the Insane Hospital, held their offices by virtue of an election held in the same manner as that of the Fiftieth General Assembly above referred to, and if so they are now only officers de facto, having never any legal title. It is the opinion of a majority of the committee that the present General Assembly has the power, under the law and the constitution, and that it is its duty to elect all of the officers named, and in the manner provided for in this resolution.
Mr. WORKS, as a member of the
Mr. SLEETH, in presenting the report of the minority of the committee, explained that
the necessity for a minority report only became apparent about two hours ago, and, on
account of the brief time, with dinner intervening, two members of the minority had
worked separately on the report and tacked their work together and were compelled to
submit the same without an opportunity of comparing the different parts, in
consequence of which
The report was signed by Messrs. Sleeth, March, Gordon and Shanks, and covers some 20 foolscap pages, in which the minority of the committee set out the reasons why they consider as valid the election, in 1877, of the president of the several boards, and one trustee for the Deaf and Dumb, and one trustee for the Blind, and one commissioner for the Insane Asylum, by the General Assembly in joint convention. Every department of the State has ratified and sanctioned the mode of election now in question, as shown by this report. It closes by recommending that the concurrent resolution be amended by striking out "two" where it occurs in relation to the number of officers to be elected, and inserting; 'one;'in lieu thereof, and by striking out ail in relation to the election of a president of the several boards.
Mr. SLEETH insisted there was no escape from the conclusion that the law of l859 intended these several Boards should have a member who had seen some service thereon be retained at all times. In 1873 and 1875 there were elections held in the same manner as the one in 1877, and Governors Baker and Hendricks raised no question as to the legality of such elections, and Governor Williams himself, a member then, conceded their legality.
Mr. BRIGGS said there was nothing in the journals that shows the House of Representatives in 1877 ever met to elect these officers. Under the statute it takes the concurrent action of both Houses to elect. It is evidently the intention of the law that one experienced, member of each Board should hold over. There was a failure to comply with the law by the last General Assembly. The joint committee had no more power to elect these officers than had a meeting composed of any other 150 men. It would be hard to construe the statute so as to legalize that election.
Mr. WORKS spoke in favor of his report.
Mr. OSBORNE, of Elkhart, deemed a joint convention of the two Houses of the General Assembly, a distinct parliamentary body, as distinct as either one of the two branches of the Legislature. It was this body that attempted to elect these officers in 1877 Routine in office is the only safeguard. Men should go out of office promptly on the expiration of their term. The Legislature may elect whenever a vacancy occurs. This is the body to elect these officers, and this body is required to do so by statute.
Mr. GORDON protested the exercise of party power. There ought to be rotation in office. He would not vote for a man for the third time as president. Be complimented the present management of the benevolent institutions of the State, if the governor has not commissioned these officials he has recognized them by acting with them.
Mr. SAINT regarded every act of the joint convention two years ago as illegal in reference to the election of the officers referred to in this resolution. The gentleman from Marion had cited no recognition, by the executive, of these men. They held their positions under the clause in the statute which says they shall remain in office until their successors are elected and qualified.
Mr. GORDON moved that the whole subject lie on the table.
The motion was rejected by--yeas 29, nays 49.
Mr. THOMPSON had prepared an argument on this question, but in view of the work before the House, demanded the previous question. The demand was seconded by the House of Representatives, and, under its operations, the minority report was rejected by--yeas 29, nays 49.
Mr. Works' report was also rejected by--yeas 32, nays 48.
The majority report was then concurred in by--yeas 47, nays 30.
The resolution, as amended, was then adopted by--yeas 48, nays 30--as follows:
AYES--Messrs, Alden,Allen, Barker, Briggs, Brown of Jasper, Bryant, Caldwell, Carter, Compton, Confer, Dailey, Davidson, Davis, Drake, Drover, Edwins, English, Faulkner, Flodder, Galbraith, Garroutte, Ginz, Hosmer, Humphreys, Huthsteiner, Kester, Lehman, Major, Mitchell, Nave, Osborn of Elkhart, Osborn of Vermillion, Perry Reicheldater, Rooker, Saint, Scholl, Schwitzer, Shields, Stucker, Taylor of Daviess, Taylor of Warrick, Thompson, Tulley, Vanpelt, Willard, Wimmer, Mr. Speaker--48.
Nays--Messrs. Arnold of Grant and Black, Arnold of Wabash, Bearss, Carey, Connoway, Conner, Copeland, Donnell, Gordon, Herod, Hess, Hopkins, Kelly, Kirkpatrick, Lindley, March, Messick, Owen, Robeson, Robinson, Shanks, Skinner, Sleeth, Snoddy, Stevens, Taylor of LaGrange, Thayer, Vawter, Watson, Works--30.
And then the House adjourned.
After prayer by Rey. JOSEPH BRADFORD CLEAVER, of the Church of Christ--
On motion of Mr. REEVE the reading of the secretary's minutes of yesterday's proceedings was dispensed with.
Dozens of reports from committees were submitted and placed on the files without reading, under a custom grown up this session, and continued by unanimous consent.
Mr. REEVE offered the following:
It was adopted.
Bills for acts were introduced, read the first time and severally referred to appropriate committees, to wit:
By Mr. HEILMAN, [S. 325] to amend the charter of the town of Evansville.
By Mr. MAJOR, [S. 326] to divide the State into congressional districts.
By Mr. REEVE, [S. 327] providing for remonstrance of people against granting license for vending intoxicating liquors as a beverage to be drank on the premises where sold, and prohibiting issue of licenses.
By Mr. STREIGHT, [S. 328] to repeal the act limiting the eligibility to office of township trustees.
By Mr. DICE, by request, [S. 229] requiring county recorders to record powers of attorneys.
By Mr. HEFRON, [S. 330] to prevent fraud, bribery and corruption in elections--declaring it unlawful for a candidate even so much as to treat for the purpose of influencing votes.
By Mr. TARLTON [S. 331] to amend section 1 of an act authorizing city or town school trustees to pay over to such towns surplus special school revenue for the payment of indebtedness created for school buildings, etc., approved March 3, 1877.
By Mr. DONHAM [S. 332] in relation to State and other roads--State roads hereafter shall not be less than 33 feet in width, township roads 20 feet, private roads 16 1/2 feet.
By Mr. DONHAM [S. 333] in relation to the muzzling of dogs--shall be muzzled from 6 a. m. to 6 o'clock p. m.
By Mr. SARNIGHAUSEN [S. 334] to amend section 6 of the common school law supplementary act of March 8, 1873.
By Mr. SARNIGHAUISEN, [S. 335] authorizing justices of the peace, when re-elected, to retain possession of their former dockets and papers.
By Mr. MOORE, [S. 336] to limit the time of bringing action to recover real estate or set aside conveyances purporting to be made by married women of unsound minds, in certain cases--within one year after the taking effect of this act.
By the
By Mr. LEEPER, [S. 338] for the protection of wild game and defining the manner and the time in which the same shall be taken; prohibiting the shipping of game from the State; for the protection of certain birds and their eggs; and making it unlawful to go upon enclosed lands for the purpose of hunting, without the permission of the owner.
By Mr. HART, [S. 339] to authorize county commissioners to contract for the public printing of the county; and books, stationery and other articles necessary in the conduct of the public business of the county.
By Mr. SARNIGHAUSEN [S. 340] to repeal the act authorizing the appointment of students to Purdue university.
By Mr. TREAT, [S. 341] defining what counties shall constitute the 10th judicial circuit.
By Mr. BURRELL,[S. 342] to amend section three of the act of May 29, 1852, prescribing the duties of justices of the peace.
By Mr. BURRELL, [S. 343] providing for appointment, by circuit judges, of a public adminstrator in each county--per diem $2.
By Mr. MENZIES by request,[S. 344] authorizing the transfer of cases from justices of the peace to the circuit and Superior courts in certain cases.
By Mr. WOOD,[S. 445] to authorize the payment of money due Mrs. Caroline Holman, $447, and $153.10 claim of G. Zackaw.
By Mr. VIEHE, [S. 346] to repeal an act to authorize and provide for changes of venue in civil actions in certain cases, approved March 8, 1867.
By Mr. HEILMAN, by request, [S. 347] to amend the charter of the city of Evansville and to change the name of Evansville to that of Lamasco.
By Mr. REEVE, [S. 348] for minority representation by means of a free ballot by cumulative voting.
By Mr. BRISCOE, [S. 349], declaring the rights of laborers and employes in connection with their wages, and providing that judgements for wages shall be liens upon the property of the employer.
By Mr. DICE, [S. 350] making township trustees of each civil township superintendent of roads and highways in his township, and fixing a commutation road tax in lieu of road labor.
By Mr. TRUSLER, by request, [S. 351] to regulate the practice of dentistry in the State of Indiana.
By Mr. DAVENPORT, by request, [S. 352] to discourage the keeping, owning and harboring of unlicensed dogs--over six months, $2 for each male, and $5 for each female dog, license fee, in advance, each year.
By Mr. LANGDON. [S. 353] supplemental to act of June 17,1852, concerning trusts and powers. All trustees to be bona fide residents of the State.
By Mr. HEFRON, [S. 354] to divide the State of Indiana into congressional districts.
By Mr. W1LSON, [S. 355] to abolish the office of State geologist, and too transfer all collections and property to Purdue university.
Then came the recess for dinner.
By Mr. KRAMER, [S. 356] relating to prosecutions by affidavit and information.
By Mr. HEFRON, [S. 357] to repeal the act concerning interest on money of March 9, 1867; and on judgments, of February 5, 1873.
By Mr. GARRIGUS, by request, [S. 358] authorizing incorporated cities of 6,000 inhabitants or less, and owing $30,000 or more, to have a city comptroller appointed [by circuit judges], the tax duplicate to be made out by the county auditor, and taxes to be collected by the county treasurer.
By Mr. BRISCOE, [S. 359] to repeal section 1 of the act of March 14, 1877, to provide record books for justices of the peace.
By Mr. FOSTER, [S. 360] to provide offices for justices of the peace--by county commissioners--rent not to exceed $150 a year.
By Mr. WOODS, [S. 361] to repeal the act of March 14, 1877, for giving notice of pending suits affecting real estate in certain cases.
By Mr. TAYLOR, by request, [S. 362] to amend section 1 of an act amendatory of the relocation of county seat acts--65 per cent, to petition.
On motion of Mr. SARNIGHAUSEN the Senate returned to the consideration of his bill, [S. 9] to provide anatomical subjects for dissection. The question pending at the adjournment last night being in an amendment to insert the words "medical associations" after the word "college" in section 2.
Mr. DICE opposed the amendment for the reason that it would establish in every county a dissecting room. The inevitable result would be a radical change--a chance for public dissections by medical societies in almost every county. A poor man dies in the county asylum, and the first rumor that goes abroad is that the doctors have got his body. "Let us go and see him," will be the cry. The law authorizes it, and the result will be great scandal. It is bad enough to have these bodies sent to the medical colleges, let alone giving this power to medical societies. The science of medicine will not be greatly advanced by this amendment, and it ought not to be adopted.
Mr. HEFRON did not believe this amendment contemplates the public dissection of human bodies. He opposed giving monopoly to medical colleges, for there are many medical societies having as able members as are embraced in the faculties of medical colleges. If the right is given to colleges it should be given to associations also.
Mr. TREAT thought the amendment very objectionable. He might possibly vote for the bill, but not for the amendment.
Mr. URMSTON could see no valid objection to his amendment. Whether the meetings of these medical associations are public or not,they ought to be entitled to anatomical subjects as well as colleges.
Mr. WOOLLEN said the present law places the members of his profession under great
disadvantages in this: the law requires them to be possessed of the highest order of
knowledge and yet shuts the door for the obtaining of that knowledge. Senators are not
warranted in intimating that medical societies would allow the public to witness the
dissection of human bodies. He assured senators that the public taste would not be
offended through the working of this amendment, should it become a law. The memories
of physicians should frequently he refreshed, in many instances, and they should not
be compelled to travel to some medical college to get an opportunity to refresh their
memories. Unless this amendment is incorporated in the bill,it will not be of much
benefit to the profession at large. This country owes
Mr. SHAFFER believed senators were ready to vote on this amendment. He hoped the amendment would be passed, otherwise the bill would be crippled and fail to meet the wants of the profession.
Mr. WOOD would allow no one to go farther than he to advance the interests of the medical profession; but this bill is full of mischief and, should it pass, no act would cause more terror in the minds of the people. It is the worst piece of class legislation yet introduced into these halls. It proposes to give a particular right to 99 or 100 societies in the State. This would be construed as a loathing license to go to the grave-yards and procure anatomical subjects: the bars will be broken down, and the grave-yards opened all over the State. This bill would prove to be a feeder to three or four medical colleges in the State. Senators should look to the effect on the minds of the people that this bill would have. The establishing of a saw-bones institution at every door, in the face of our children and our friends, is appalling, and ought not to be allowed.
The yeas and nays were ordered, and, being taken, the amendment was agreed to by yeas 27, nays 14.
On motion, by Mr. GRUBBS, section 2 was further amended by providing that should the remains of any persons so delivered by subsequently claimed within 24 hours by any relative or friend, they shall be given up.
Mr. URMSTON moved to strike from section 4 the proviion that the court may dispose of the body at the time of death sentence.
Mr. HEFRON and Mr. MENZIES favored the amendment. It would strike out a very repulsive feature of the bill.
The amendment was agreed to.
Other minor amendments were made, and the bill as amended was passed the second reading, by yeas 27, nays 13; and, on motion, ordered engrossed for the third reading.
On motion by Mr. SARNIGHAUSEN, the bill [S. 136--Mr. DICE's] to regulate the use of human bodies for the purposes of dissection, was taken up.
And then the Senate adjourned.
The SPEAKER called the House to order and announced the opening, with prayer by Mr. SNODDY,the representative from Hendricks county.
The journal of yesterday was read until--
On the motion of Mr. GORDON the further reading of the journal was dispensed with.
Mr. CALDWELL stated that the
The SPEAKER called for reports from committees.
The following reports from committees were submitted and concurred in, unless otherwise stated:
The committee on elections reported a bill [H. R. 453] to amend section two of an act; prohibiting for the election and appointment of supervisors of highways, which was read the first time. Also the bill [H. R. 270] to protect the ballot-box, with a report recommending its passage.
The bill [H. R. 31] to define certain practices in various courts, with a report recommending that it be indefinitely postponed.
Mr. ALLEN explained that the object of this bill was to prevent the double trial by the mayor's court and justices of the peace.
Mr. OSBORN of Elkhart, said the committee was compelled to look a little deeper. The bill would prevent any punishment by the State after the case was tried before a mayor's court, and was likely to favor criminals.
On the motion of Mr. GORDON the bill was referred to a special committee of five, with instructions to prepare a new bill on the subject.
The bill [H. R. 35] providing for the election and qualification of justices of the peace, was returned, with a report recommending that the bill be indefinitely postponed.
The report of the committee was laid on the table, and the bill was ordered engrossed.
The special committee on the bill [H. R. 31] authorized by Mr. Gordon's motion, was made to consist of Messrs. Gordon, March, Work, OSborne of Elkahart, and Mr. Dailey.
The bill [H. R. 53] defining who shall be competent witnesses, was returned, with a report recommending its indefinite postponement.
The bill [H. R. 60] to incorporate the Orphan' Home of New Albany, was reported back from the committee, with a recommendation that it be indefinitely postponed.
The bill, [H. R. 97] to authorize justices of the peace to appoint constables, was returned with a report recommending its indefinite postponement.
The bill, [H. R. 106] to provide for the election of three special judges, was reported back with a recommendation for indefinite postponement.
The bill, [H. R. 124] touching the duties of township trustees, was reported with a recommendation for indefinite postponement.
The bill, [H. R. 128] for the release of sureties, and providing for new bonds of administrators or guardians, was returned from the committee, with a report recommending indefinite postponement.
Mr. WATSON, explaining, said: The object of the bill is, that when a new bond is given, to have it refer back and cover any action under the old bond.
The bill, [H. R. 133] fixing the time when causes shall stand for trial, was reported back with a report recommending its indefinite postponement.
Mr. BRIGGS stated that this bill changes the rule as to practice in the circuit courts only. He moved that the report of the committee be laid on the table and demanded the yeas and nays, which being ordered and taken resulted--yeas 51, nays 31.
So the report of the committee lies on the table.
On his further motion the bill was ordered to be engrossed for the third reading.
The bill [H. R. 48] fixing the time when actions shall stand for trial in the circuit courts, was returned by a majority of the committee recommending that the bill be indefinitely postponed.
A minority report was also read recommending its passage.
Pending the adoption of the minority report, the House took a recess for dinner.
The SPEAKER resumed at '2 o'clock.
Mr. SHANK moved that the further consideration of the bill [H. R. 48] and accompanying reports lie on the table for the present.
The motion was agreed to.
The House resolution of inquiry as to the feasibility of creating in each county a probate court was returned from the committee with the recommendation that the resolution be referred to the committee on organization of courts.
The bill [H. R. 234] for the protection of fish was reported back with a recommendation that it lie on the table.
The bill [H. R. 215] to prevent carrying dead hogs through thoroughfares was reported back with amendments, and when so amended the committee recommended that the bill do pass.
Mr. EDWINS said the virus from hog cholera is scattered all through Eastern Indiana by dead hogs being can led through the thorough-fares.
On the motion of Mr. HEROD, the bill lies on the table for the present.
The bill [H. R. 105) to regulate the practice of dentistry was returned with a report recommending that it do pass.
The report was rejected.
On the motion of Mr. WILLARD, the further consideration of this bill was suspended, and the bill laid on the table.
The bill [H. R. 291] to provide dead bodies for the use of medical colleges was returned from the committee with a report, recommending that the bill do pass, and that 200 copies be ordered printed for the use of the House of Representatives.
The bill [H. R. 329] to establish a state board of health was returned with a report recommending that it lie on the table.
On the motion of Mr. WILLARD, the report was recommitted to the same committee, to give the author an opportunity to explain its provisions before thee committee.
The
A minority of the same committee submitted a report on the bill [H. R. 278] to exempt $500 from sale on execution recommending that it pass.
The minority report was returned to the member introducing it.
On the motion of Mr. Lindley the new bill [H. R. 453] introduced by the committee was returned to the committee with instructions to report the bill as an amendment to Mr. Conner's bill on the same subject.
The bill [H. R. 159] to secure a homestead to resident householders was returned with a recommendation that it be indefinitely postponed.
The bill [H. R. 161] to exempt homestead property from sale in certain cases was reported back from the committee with a report recommending that it lie on the table.
Mr. WILLARD called for the yeas and nays on concurring in this report, and being ordered and taken they resulted, yeas 51, nays 9.
There being no quorum voting, a call of the House was ordered, and being taken, discovered a quorum present.
The yeas and nays being called again on concurring in tho report of the committee, resulted--yeas 52, nays 15; so the report was concurred in.
The bill, [H. R. 301] to amend an act to exempt property from sale in certain cases, was returned from the committee with a report recommending indefinite postponement
The bill [H. R. 104] to amend the act to exempt property from sale in certain cases, was reported back to the committee with a report recommending its indefinite postponement.
The bill [H. R. 182] to exempt personal property from execution was returned with a recommendation that it be indefinitely postponed.
The report lies on the table by consent.
The bill [H. R. 210] to allow a reasonable homestead, was returned from the committee with a recommendation that it be indefinitely postponed.
The bill [H. R. 127] to exempt a homestead was returned with a report recommending that it be indefinitely postponed.
On the motion of Mr. WALTON the report and the bill lies on the table.
The bill [H. R. 846] to encourage the planting and growing of trees was returned from the committee with a report recommending its passage.
The
The joint resolution [H. R. 14] on the subject of Mormonism was returned from a committee with a recommendation that it be indefinitely positioned.
The resolution congratulating the country on the fact of specie resumption was referred back with a report recommending indefinite postponement.
The yeas and nays being demanded--upon the indefinite postponement of the resolution--and being taken resulted yeas 35, nays 27.
No quorum voting.
A call of the House being ordered and taken discovered but 64 members present.
The House then adjourned.
Prayer by Rev. W. B. F. TREAT, senator for the counties of Monroe and Lawrence.
The reading of the minutes of yesterday's proceedings was dispensed with.
On motion of Mr. MENZIES the House concurrent resolution, for a joint convention at 10 o'clock to-day, to elect a State librarian and directors of the State Prisons north and south, was taken up, amended by changing the hour to 2 o'clock p. m., and passed the Senate without a division.
Mr. REEVE, rising to a question of privilege, stated that early in the session he
introduced a bill at the instance of the Superintendent of Public Instruction, which was
read the first time, and referred to the
On motion of Mr. STREIGHT, his joint resolution for instruction and request of Indiana congressmen to favor the passage of the bill passed by the lower House of the national legislature, to regulate inter-state commerce was taken up, with a committee report recommending its indefinite postponement.
Mr. STREIGHT spoke against concurrence in the committee report. It is understood by all parties that organized capital has a powerful lobby wherever legislation by that class is desired, but no plan can be brought about by which legislators can properly understand the wishes of the people on any given question. Unless the people can successfully strike against this great monopoly--this pooling--no man can ship surplus produce without bowing in submission to its iron rule. In this city, in one day, this pool caused our shippers to lose $40,000. Under these pool arrangements it la impossible to have competition.
Mr. BRISCOE heartily joined the senator from Marion [Mr. Streight] in hoping the report would not be concurred in. There can come no harm from such a resolution as this.
Mr. HEFRON had a war to make in favor of right, and should continue such fight as long as he had a vote to cast. The combinations of these immense corporations practice great injustice upon the people, and, if Congress has the power so to do, the people should be protected against such a monopoly. He hoped the report would not be concurred in.
Mr. REEVE, as one of the committee who made the report, gave reasons for the action of the committee. It could see no good reason for passing the resolution,as the United States Senate is already advised of the wishes of the people by the action of the United States House of Representatives. The notion is in the direction desired by the resolution, and is unnecessary in the particular stage in which the subject now stands in the national legislature. He should sustain the action of the committee.
Mr. FOWLER: Whenever important measures are pending affecting the money power they find many supporters; but when the people desire action their measures are not so well supported. This Senate ought to pass this resolution, and he desired to urge congressmen to regulate railroad corporations so they shall be compelled to do justice to the people.
Mr. TRUSLER heartily concurred in the remarks made in opposition to concurring in
this report from the
Mr. HARRIS thought the step proposed to be taken was worthy of grave consideration.
He was not willing to concede the power to Congress of legislating on our State
tariffs. It is only where a railroad corporation run in or through one or more States
that Congress has the power to interfere under the federal consti-[tution]
Mr. MENZIES favored concurrence in the committee reports, because believing in the reserving inviolate the rights of States, he was fearful of any power looking to a centralization of power. This resolution presents a most serious problem, viz: How to handle this great monopoly,Give such power to Congress and the railroad combination would own Congress in less than six months--body, soul, and breeches. He would rather pin his faith to the several Legislatures; the railroads might buy two or three but they have not enough to go all round. Some of these great corporations have more wealth than the Roman empire, and it will require master statesmanship to protect the people against these encroachments. It is unnecessary to ask the Senate, after the immature consideration afforded by a 40 minutes' debate, to act upon so important a measure.
Mr. WOOD wanted exact justice as between the railroad and the people. He resolution does not contemplate the regulating of railroad freights in Indiana, but to favor a general freight bill for all the States. He was surprised senators would intimate to the contrary. Legislatures made the railroad companies, and it is a hard proposition to say we can not unmake or regulate them.
Mr. REEVE compared this debate to a dispute between two Irishmen as to whether one was digging a hole or only pulling out the dirt while the hole dug itself. He made in effectual demand for the previous question.
Mr. VIEHE, while opposed to this resolution, did not desire to be understood as opposing the principle in it. He was not strongly in favor of instructing or requesting congressmen at any time or on any occasion. Railroads have conferred on this country almost inestimable blessings, and he would like to see competing lines everywhere and anywhere, all over this land. We can not expect freights to be the same throughout the entire line of the road.
Mr. KENT also favored concurrence in the committee report. The State of Indiana can well afford to let this resolution alone. He doubted the power of Congress to pass such a bill as the resolution refers to. At least was willing to leave it in the hands of Indiana's representative in Congress.
Mr. Langdon falls to see any legal reason why the committee should have brought in such a report on this resolution. The only question is whether it is for the interests of our people that we should vote the instruction contemplated by the pending resolution, and of that we are the sole judges. The people of this State are interested in inter-state commerce, and why should they not express their opinions on this subject through their representatives here? There ought to be something done in this direction. We have the indorsement of the Lower House of Congress, and now we only ask to instruct our senators to aid in cutting down a great abuse at as early a day as possible. WE should not sit silent and allow a few men to fix arbitrary rates for freight and put an iron heel on competition. He saw no judicial reason to sustain the report, and many why it should be rejected.
Mr. REEVE, as far as the question of railroad is concerned, this Senate or any other may talk till Gabriel blows his last trumpet and nothing will be accomplished. It is not worth while to argue about matters of fact--principles may be discussed. To-day there are nearly $300,000,000 of foreign capital invested in railroads in this country that does not pay a cent of interest on the investment, while paying heavy taxes that relieve the burden of the resident tax payer and brings to this door every facility for getting surplus products to market, near and far away from this own door. While railroads have a corporate existence they are but individuals; they operate these companies for the purpose of making money out of them. The resolution goes so far as the say that congress may dictate to these companies what they shall charge for transportation of freights. Some senators doubt this right; there is not doubt about it; Congress has no right to regulate this matter; it would lead to imperialism, and this Senate surely is not prepared to vote against this committee report and thus place itself in such a position.
Mr. TRUSLER came here to legislate for the people. The Jeffersonian principle is against all monopolies. He hoped the resolution would be adopted.
Mr. STREIGHT replied to some of the arguments made by the senator in favor of the committee report. This subject affects the interest of more people than any bill that will come before this body. He believed any senator opposing this resolution would oppose measures favorable to the people and leaning toward the interests of the railroads. This bill does not seek to legislate so as to fix the prices of transportation of freight. He protested against unfair representation in this debate, and urged the rejection of the committee report and the passage of his resolution.
The committee report was rejected by--yeas, 15, nays 32.
Mr. HARRIS moved to amend by adding to the preamble a declaration that it is wrong for any railroad to carry freight and passengers for less than cost, with a reasonable profit added.
Mr. BURRELL moved to lay it on the table.
The yeas were demanded on the motion to lay on the table, pending which came the recess to 2 o'p.m.
Mr. BURRELL withdrew his motion to lay on the table.
Mr. STREIGHT demanded the previous question, which was seconded by the Senate--yeas 41, nays 8--and under its operation the amendment was being voted on, when a committee from the House of Representatives appeared to escort the Senate to the hall of the House for a joint convention, as provided for by amendment resolution, for the election of State librarian and prison directors. Senators left the chamber in charge of the House committee.
When senators returned the amendment [Mr. Harris'] was rejected by--yeas 38, nays 9; and the resolution was adopted by--yeas 34, nays 13.
Pending the roll call--
The bill to which the resolution refers was read for information.
Mr. GARRIGUS, in explanation of his vote, when his name was called, said: It seemed to be worse than playing blindfold for this Senate to say to members in Congress that they shall vote for that bill. He did not believe a half dozen Senators understood the provisions of the bill now, not even enough to say that our members of Congress ought to vote for it. And not believing it to be within the province of Congress to come in to the State of Indiana to regulate matters here, he should vote "no."
Mr. GRUBBS, when his name was called, said he believed senators and representatives in Congress were as immediate representatives of the people as we, and that they will vote properly upon the bill before them. He was in favor of regulating this matter as comprehended in the joint resolution, and if it were calling attention to the unjust discriminations practiced by railroad monopolies generally and asking Congress to legislate so as to regulate that matter, he would favor it; but as has been intimated by the senator from Howard (Mr. Garrigus) he was not sufficiently acquainted with the provisions of the bill to know whether it is wise to pass it or not. Therefore he would vote "no."
Mr. HEILMAN, when his name was called in explanation of his vote said: Believing as I do that this bill is a high handed outrage on men who have invested money in railroads. I am compelled to vote "no."
Mr. MENZIES, in explanation of his vote said as he understood this bill he took it to be in violation of a cardinal doctrine of the Democratic party--a violation of the rights of States--and he should oppose anything that would wantonly violate the rights of States; therefore he voted "no."
Mr. REEVE, when his name was called, said: Knowing this bill to be unconstitutional; believing it to be class legislation; that such action taken by this body would be dangerous in character and tend to disrupt the public peace, and interfere with the rules and laws of trade--a thing that ought to be condemned--and believing that no good can grow out of it, he desired to express his protest against it, first last, and all the time, and do what little he could to defend it. Therefore, he voted in the negative.
Mr. SHAFFER,in explanation of his vote when his name was called, said, while he held the opinion, as expressed by other senators, that railroad transportation should be regulated in some way, yet, at the same time, he had always been very slow to attempt to instruct senators in Congress, or any person who knows more about any particular matter than himself, and therefore he voted "no."
Mr. TREAT, when his name was called, was understood to say that, as he believed congressmen would cast their votes without regard to any remonstrances or instructions from us, he would vote "no."
The result was announced as above recorded; so the resolution was adopted.
And then the Senate adjourned.
The SPEAKER called, the House to order, and announced that the proceedings this morning would be opened with prayer by the representative from Hancock county, Mr. HANDY.
The reading of the journal was ordered, and read, until--
On the motion of Mr. HEROD, the future reading was discontinued.
The SPEAKER said that the first thing in order was the disposition of unfinished business, being the consideration of the resolution congratulating the country on resumption of specie payment, with a report recommending its indefinite postponement, submitted by the committee on Federal relations.
The yeas and nays on concuring in the report being demanded, they were ordered and being taken--resulted, yeas 50, nays 33.
So the resolution was indefinitely postponed.
The SPEAKER then announced the special order for the hour--the joint convention of the two Houses of the General Assembly, for the election of State librarian and the trustees of the prisons north and south.
Seats for senators were accordingly prepared on the right of the speaker. The committee to wait upon the Senate informed the House that the Senate had amended the resolution so as to meet the House of Representatives in joint convention this afternoon at two and a half o'clock.
The
The report of the committee was rejected, and--
On the motion of Mr. LEHMAN the resolution was laid on the table.
The House took up the message just received from the Senate fixing the time of the joint convention for the election of librarian and prison trustees at 2:30 o'clock this afternoon.
On motion of Mr. HUMPHREY the amendment was concurred in.
The
The report was concurred in.
Under the operations of the previous question the resolution was adopted--yeas 53, nays 40, as follows:
Yeas--Messrs. Alden, Allen, Barker, Baker, Bearss, Blockley, Briggs, Brown of Jasper, Bryant, Caldwell, Campbell, Carter, Compton, Confer, Cunningham, Dailey, Dalton, Davidson, Davis, Drake, Drover, Edwins, Flodder, Galbraith, Garroutte, Ginz, Handy, Hart, Hosemer, Humphreys, Huthsteiner, Kester, Lehman, Messick, Miers, Mitchell, Osborn of Elkhart, Osborn of Vermillion, Perry, Reicheldafer, Rooker, Scholl, Schweitzer, Shauck, Shields, Stucker, Taylor of Daviess, Taylor or Warrick, Thompson, Van Valzah, Willard, Wimmer, Mr. Speaker--53
Nays--Messrs Arnold of Grant and Blackford, Arnold of Wabash, Brown of Steuben, Carey, Connaway, Conner, Copeland, Donnell, English, Fancher, Faulkner, Golden, Gordon, Herod, Hess, Hopkins, Kelly, Kirkpatrick, Dindley, Major, March, Nave, Overmeyer, Reed, Robeson, Rodman, Robinson, Shanks, Skinner, Sleeth, Snoddy, Stevens, Taylor of LaGrange, Thayer, Thornburg, Tulley, Vanpelt, Vawter, Watson, Works--40.
So the resolution was adopted.
The
The resolution was passed the House of Representatives by--yeas, 90, nays, 2.
Pending the roll call Mr. SHANKS, when his name was called, in explanation of his vote
said: While he was opposed to instructing other people in the management of the business
committed to them, he was constrained to vote for this resolution. He said that
mem-[bers]
Mr. Speaker CAUTHORNE, when his name was called, said for the same reasons stated by the gentleman from Jay [Mr. Shanks] he should vote "aye."
So the result was then announced, as above recorded.
So the resolution was adopted.
The
On the motion of Mr. THOMPSON, the report lies on The table.
Mr. OVERMEYER moved that the resolution be recommitted to the
The motion was agreed to.
The
Also, the bill [H. R. 167] prohibiting hunting on inclosed lands without consent of the owner, with a recommendation that the bill pass.
The bill on the motion of Mr. LEHMAN, was laid on the table.
The same committee returned the bill, [H. R. 225] to prevent the spread of Canada thistles, with amendments and a recommendation that the bill when so amended do pass.
Also the bill, [H. R. 179] to prohibit the sale of adulterated fertilizers, with a recommendation that it do pass.
Also the bill, [H. R. 210] for the regulation of weights and measures, with a recommendation that it do pass.
Mr. KIRKPATRICK said the only object of this bill was to make the law of this State to conform with the laws of adjoining states in the weight or corn, making 70 pounds instead of 68 pounds for a bushel.
On the motion of Mr. OVERMEYER the section of the old law set forth in the bill was stricken out.
Mr. THAYER moved that the bill be engrossed as amended, without being printed.
It was so ordered.
The
On motion the bill was laid on the table.
The committee also returned the bill [H. R. 59] to allow appeal from county board, with a recommendation that the bill do pass. The bill was ordered engrossed for the third reading.
Also the bill [H. R. 21] abolishing the office of county assessor, with a recommendation that it lie on the table.
The bill and amendments were recommitted to the committee.
The House took a recess until 2 o'clock.
The
The report was concurred in.
Mr. Faulkner offered a resolution to rescind the order to permit bills that are reported favorably upon by committees.
The further consideration of the resolution was postponed until after the joint convention.
Senators appearing and being seated upon the right of the speaker's chair.
The LIEUTENANT GOVERNOR called the convention to order and directed the secretary of the Senate to call the roll of senators; which order being executed discovered 50 senators present and answering to their names. He then directed the clerk of the House of Representatives to call the roll of representatives, which discovered 93 representatives present and answering to their names. He ordered the clerk to read the concurrent resolution under which this assembly was convened--that paper not being found--
Representative OVERMEYER offered a resolution, which was adopted, that the joint convention proceed with the elections in the following order, viz: (1) Librarian. (2) Directors of the Prison South. (3) Directors of the Prison North.
The LIEUTENANT GOVERNOR called for nominations for State librarian.
Representative OVERMEYER nominated B. A. Conner, of Marion county.
Representative LEHMAN nominated Miss Maggie Fitzgibbon, formerly of Johnson, now of Marion county.
Representative MAJORS nominated Henry Olav Sailors, of Marion county.
There being no other nominations the ballot resulted as follows: For Mr. Sailors--senators 1, representatives 2, total 3 votes: for Mr. Connor--senators 23, representatives 33. total 56 votes; for Miss Fitzgibbon--senators 26, representatives 58, total 84 votes.
The LIEUTENANT GOVERNOR declared Miss Maggie Fitzgibbon duly elected to the office of State librarian for the term prescribed by law. [Applause.] He then stated that nomination for a director for the State Prison South were in order.
Senator REILEY nominated Thos. W. Shea, of Scott county.
Senator COMSTOCK nominated Charles T. Coffin, of Wayne county.
Representative OSBORN of Vermillion nominated Alex W. Monroe, of Floyd county.
There being no further nominations the ballot resulted: For Mr. Shea--senators 26, representatives 54, total 80 Votes; for Mr. Coffin--senators 23, representatives 35, total 58 votes; for Mr. Monroe--senators 1, representatives 2, total 3 votes
The LIEUTENANT GOVERNOR declared Thos.W. Shea duly elected a Director for the States Prison South for the term prescribed by law. Nominations for another Director for the States Prison South being in order.--
Representative MIERS nominated P. L. D. Mitchell, of Monroe county.
Senator GRUBBS nominated Samuel D. Platt, of Perry county.
Representative OSBORNE, of Vermillion, nominated James H. Benton, of Morgan county.
There being no further nominations, the ballot resulted--
For Mr. Mitehen--Senators, 26; Representatives, 57. Total, 83 votes.
For Mr. Platt--Senators, 23; Representatives, 33. Total, 56 votes.
For Mr. Benton--Senators, 1; Representatives, 2. Total, 3 votes.
The LIEUTENANT GOVERNOR declared Mr. Mitchell duly elected a Director of the States Prison South for the term prescribed by law.
Nominations for Directors of the States Prison North being next in order--
Senator KENT nominated John Lee, of Montgomery county.
Representative COPELAND nominated John W. Baker, of Whitley county.
Senator POINDEXTER nominated John C. Campbell of Henry county.
There being no further nominations, the ballot resulted--
For Mr. Lee--Senators, 26; Representatives, 53. Total, 79 votes.
For Mr. Baker--Senators, 23; Representatives, 34. Total, 57 votes.
For Mr. Campbell--Senators, 1; Representatives, 3. Total, 4 votes
The LIEUTENANT GOVERNOR declared Mr. Lee duly elected a Direct or of the State Prison north for the term prescribed by law. Nominations for another Director of the State Prison north being in order
Senator COFFEE nominated Frederick Hoover, of Jasper county.
Representative COPELAND nominated Robert Dykes of Noble county.
Senator P01NDEXTER nominated Richard Haslett, of Putnam county.
There being no other nominations, the ballot resulted:
For Mr. Hoover--Senators, 26; Representatives, 54. Total, 80 votes.
For Mr. Dykes--Senators, 23; Representatives, 34. Total, 51 votes.
For Mr. Haslett--Senators, 1;. Representatives 3. Total, 4 votes.
The LIEUTENANT GOVERNOR declared Mr. Hoover duly elected a Director of the State Prison north for the term prescribed by law.
Nominations for another Director of the State Prison north being next in order
Senator MENZlES nominated Simon Wile, of Laporte county.
Representative COPELAND nominated Charles R. Luther, of Porter county.
Senator POINDEXTER nominated Henry Goar, of Tipton county.
There being no further nominations, the ballot resulted: For Mr Wile--Senators 26; Representatives 53. Total 79 votes. For Mr. Luther--Senators 22; Representatives 35. Total 57 votes. For Mr. Goar--Senators 1; Representatives 3. Total 4 votes.
The LIEUTENANT GOVERNOR declared Mr. Wile duly elected a director for the State Prison north for the term prescribed by law.
The Joint Assembly having completed the object for which it assembled, the LIEUTENANT GOVERNOR declared it adjourned.
Senators having retired and order being restored, the consideration of Mr. Faulkner's resolution was resumed.
Mr SLEETH moved that the whole subject and the resection be referred to a special committee of three.
It was so ordered and the SPEAKER made the committee to consist of Messrs. Osborne of Elkhart, Overmeyer and Works.
And then the House adjourned.
After prayer by Rev. Mr. Cook--
Mr. Menzies moved to dispense with the reading of the Secretary's minutes of yesterday's proceedings, which was succeeded by other motions by the same senator for a suspension of the regular order of business, that the concurrent resolution passed the House of Representatives last Saturday, (and printed in these reports of that day,) be taken up, and that the Senate adopt said resolution, and on these several motions he demanded the previous question.
Mr. Streight and other senators demanded, a division of the question.
The yeas and nays were demanded on almost every vote, and the Senate was equally divided, the lieutenant governor giving the casting vote, and thus the Senate was brought to the question of adoption or rejection of the resolution by the following vote:
Yeas--Messrs. Benz, Briscoe, Burrell, Coffey, Davis, Donham, Foster, Fowler, Hart, Hefron, Kent, Kramer, Leeper, Major, Menzies, Peterson, Riley, Sarnighausen, Tarlton, Traylor, Urmston, Viehe, Wood, Woollen, Winterbotham, Mr. President--26.
Nays--Messrs, Cadwallader, Comstock, Davenport, Dice, Garrigus, Grubbs, Harris, Heilman, Kahlo, Langdon,Mercer, Moore, Olds, Poindexter, Ragan, Reeve, Shaffer, Shirk, Smith, Straight, Taylor, Treat, Trusler, Weir, Wilson--25.
The Senate having thus agreed to consider the House concurrent resolution now, it was read by the clerk, when--
Mr. Grubbs moved to amend by striking out all that refers to electing a president of the several boards, and by striking out the word "two," where it refers to the election of trustees or commissioners, and inserting in lieu the word "one." He said no more important matter can come before the General Assembly than questions concerning the management of the benevolent institutions of the State. Such questions ought to be left outside of any political view whatever. We are governed, or should be governed, by law in this matter of electing officers of these benevolent institutions. We have no authority to elect a single one of them, though they all be vacant, unless it be in pursuance of the law approved March 5,1859. Not only is this power conferred by that law, but the time and circumstances under which we shall exercise those powers are fixed as well, and fixed in a way from which there can be no evasion by any session of the General Assembly until the law be changed. Two trustees at first were to be elected for each of these institutions, one to serve two years and the other four years, What was the purposes of the General Assembly in enacting that provision? Evidently that we might always have one man in the control of each institution who, by experience would be acquainted with its needs and wants. so there may never come a new and untried hoard. So the law provides that at each biennial session thereafter there shall be elected one member and not two. Vacancies by death, resignation or otherwise are provided for in a way perfectly consistent with the provisions of the first section of the act, If a vacancy is filled, the statute says it shall be for the unexpired term. That is the legislative interpretation of what is meant by this law. It does not take a lawyer to interpret the provisions of this law; its provisions are so plain and clear that no man need err in the interpretation of it. It provides that the biennial session of the Legislature shall only have the power, under any contingency, to elect but one member of the several boards of the benevolent institutions, while this resolution asks the Senate to take the law in its own hands and elect two. How is it with the president of the boards? The time, under the law, to elect occurred in 1877. The Legislature exercised its right and power and did elect, for a term of four years, the man who holds the position to day, and we have no right to elect again in 1879. The law provides that when elected he must be elected for the term of for the term of four years, and, as shown by a report from the secretary of state, made to the Senate yesterday, the term expired in 1877.
When Mr. G. had concluded--
Mr. MENZIES moved that the amendment [Mr. Grubbs'] be rejected and on that motion demanded the previous question.
Mr. REEVE appealed to the senator to withdraw the demand for the previous question to allow a motion to postpone the election till Thursday, February 13.
Mr. VIEHE declared that unless there is time given to consider this matter further he should vote for the amendment.
Mr. MENZIES withdrew his demand for the previous question.
Mr. VIEHE suggested to the senator from Morgan [Mr. Grubbs] to withdraw his amendment and allow the senator from Marshall [Mr. Reeve] to submit his motion.
Mr. GRUBBS: Only upon this consideration, that when this resolution comes up if we desire to offer amendments we shall have the privilege of so doing without being bound by the previous question or having it called upon us. If gentlemen will consent to that I will willingly withdraw my amendment. ["Consent." "Consent."]
Mr. MENZIES moved that the further consideration of this resolution be postponed till Thursday, the 13th instant, at 2 o'clock p. m.
The motion was agreed to by--yeas 37, nays 12.
Mr. FOSTER offered the following:
Resolved, By the Senate, the House of Representatives concurring, that our senators and representatives in Congress are respectfully request at the earliest day practicable to uses their best endeavors to secure the passage by Congress of a law preventing the uniform discrimination on the part of railways and other transportation companies in the different elates in rates against shippers, and to protect shippers against loss by reason of frequent changes in rates of transportation.
It was adopted by--yeas 37, nays 6.
The Senate took a recess till 2 o'clock.
On motion by Mr. FOSTER the bill [S. 277--the
Mr. HEFRON offered a substitute for section 1, making the rate of interest 6 per cent.
Mr. HARRIS moved to amend the substitute so that citizens may receive the same rate of interest changed by the State on school fund loans. He insisted that it would not be consistent to make the legal rate of interest, less than the rate charged by the State for loans of congressional and other foods. You can not regulate by law the price of money any more than you can regulate the price of farm pro ducts. Money in this city is now being loaned at 6 and 8 per cent. The price for the use or forbearance of money must be fixed by supply and demand and the kind of security offered. it would be a misfortune for the people if the Legislature were to create a 6 per cent. law. He was willing an 8 per cent. law should be passed, for it, is not fair to say that our citizens shall ask and receive a rate less than the rate asked and received by the State government. The effect of such a substitute as the one pending would be to drive money into the purchase of government bonds and out of the regular channels of trade.
Mr HEFRON: Whenever the question comes up for us to determine the rate the State hall charge for her loans, then will be the time for us to consider such a proposition as is contained in the amendment proposed by the senator from Marion, [Mr. Harris.] Debts are created in 1,000 different ways other than in borrowing money, and it is to cover these larger mass of dealings, that the substitute is its tended to affect. This question of interest ought to be fixed at a right, and proper standing. Is it the borrower or the poor men of the State who are insisting the rate of interest shall be kept up at 8 or 10 per cent? It is the capitalists on this floor and in the lobbies who are insisting on the higher rate, while the people at large are demanding a reduction. We should not cater to a favored few, but enact measures that will benefit the masses of the people.
Mr. REEVE protested against this pretense of discussing an interest law identically the same with the one now on the statute book. The question he desired the Senate to meet Is whether or not it will change the limit to which citizens shall go in agreements to pay for the use of money :--shall citizens have the privilege of contracting for money at a greater rate of interest than six per cent? It is not in the power of the Legislature to say a citizen shall not do a flung unless that thing is contrary to public morals or contrary to the preservation of the public liberty, person or property. He denied the assertion that the people are clamoring for a reduction of the legal rate of interest, which is now, as the statute provides, six per cent. In view of all the foreign loans in this State, renewals are absolutely necessary to prevent general bankruptcy; and is the Senate prepared to say the people shall not have this privilege if they choose to exercise it? Will this Senate say to them: your lands must go, you shall not have the privilege of renewing the loans you now have?
Mr. BURRELL: The proposition to amend the substitute is provided for in the 9th section of this bill, and that effectually does away with the pending amendment. The question of interest has always been a subject of legislation, and every Democrat upon this floor comes here well instructed upon this question. We all know no man can promise to pay ten per cent, interest, or he does not intend to pay the principal. Shall the capitalist be allowed to loan his money at an exhorbitant rate of interest and so keep the poor man down? Certainly not. He would follow instructions, and let the responsibility rest with his constituents.
Mr. FOSTER believing we have enough votes to carry this question through, demanded the previous question. The demand was seconded by the Senate upon a division--affirmative 29, negative 17, and the main question ordered by yeas 32, nays 17.
Under the operation of the previous question the amendment [Mr. Harris'] was rejected by yeas 24, nays 26, and the substitute [Mr. Hefron's] was also rejected by yeas 23, nays 27.
Mr. HARRIS moved that section 1 be adopted, and on that motion demanded the previous question, which was seconded by the Senate, and under its operation the first section was adopted by yeas 48, nays 8, in the following words:
"That the interest, on the loan or forbearance of money, goods or things in action, when the parties do not agree on the rate, shall be six dollars a year on one hundred dollars, and at that rate for a greater or less sum, or for a shorter or longer time, but it may be taken yearly, or for a shorter period in advance. And no agreement to pay a higher rate shall be valid unless the same be in writing, signed by the party to be charged thereby, and in such case it shall not be lawful to contract for more than eight per centum per annum."
Mr. FOWLER offered a substitute for section 2, that judgments hereafter rendered
shall bear the rate of six per cent., provided nothing herein shall be construed so as
to prevent the
Mr. STREIGHT insisted the section as it stands in the bill is better than the proposed substitute.
Mr. BURRELL moved to strike from the substitute the proviso.
Mr. HARRIS believed in cultivating a reasonable degree of commercial integrity. The proposed amendment would act as an incentive to men not to pay their debts, and consequently is not right. The section as in the bill is far preferable.
Mr. MENZIES regarded the substitute as effectually restoring the law as it was previous to February, 1873. While the section as in the bill would leave the law as it has been since that date.
Mr. HEFRON: The argument made by the advocates of this bill the other day was, that if a rate of six per cent were enacted, the people of this State would not renew their loans. If Senators were honest in that argument they ought not to support this measure; for this substitute would enable the borrower to evade the danger that would otherwise surround him.
Mr. STREIGHT: As the law now stands the judgment follows the rate of the note, not exceeding ten per cent interest. He moved that the substitute be rejected.
Mr. FOWLER thought the substitute would prevent the harassing of the people by the taking of judgments. Under it the borrower will be indulged for mouths and probably years. If there is a question before the Legislature the people feel a great interest in; it is this very question of interest. He desired senators to act upon this matter with great care and deliberation. The section as it now stands should not be adopted. The substitute will afford great relief to a large class of our people.
Mr. STREIGHT demanded the previous question, which was seconded by the Senate, and under its operation the substitute and amendment were both rejected by one vote. Sections was adopted without amendment by--yeas 29, nays 20--in the following words:
"All judgments in contracts hereafter rendered shall bear the same rate of interest expressed in the contract. The court rendering the judgment shall specify therein the rate of interest the sum shall bear. In other cases the rate shall be six per cent."
And then the Senate adjourned.
The House was called to order, the session being opened with prayer by Rev. Mr. PYLE, of the Methodist church.
The reading of the journal of yesterday's proceeding was read, until--
On the motion of Mr. TULLY the further leading was dispensed with.
The SPEAKER continued the call for
The
Mr. OVERMEYER said the report strikes out all after the enacting clause, and inserts new matter. He thought the report ought not to be concurred in.
Mr. LEHMAN urged the adoption of the report because it gave the people time to consider the matter, and fixed the time when the people would vote upon the question.
Mr. OSBORNE, of Elkhart, thought the April election of 1880 was perhaps the better time to submit to these amendments. If the proposition to abolish the April elections should prevail it need not take effect until After the election in April, l88O. A fair submission to the people ought to be had, so it seemed to him the report should be concurred in.
Mr. EDWINS said it seems that the opposition was trying to cast odium upon these amendments and make an additional expense of a special election. He favored the adoption of the report.
Mr. M1TCHELL was willing the people should have time to consider this question fully, but favored as little expense in the matter as possible.
Mr. HESS was in favor of an early submission of these amendments to the people--this spring, so that the fees and salaries of county officers might be regulated this year. He would favor a special session of the General Assembly, if necessary to do so.
Mr. OVERMEYER moved that the report of the committee lay on the table, and upon that motion demanded the yeas and nays.
A call of the House being demanded and taken, discovered 93 members present. Further proceedings under the call were dispensed with.
The yeas and nays being taken upon Mr. Overmeyer's motion to lay the report of the committee on the table, resulted--yeas 52, nays 42.
So the report was laid upon the table.
Mr. OVERMEYER moved to fill the blank in the bill with "the first Tuesday in March, 1879."
Mr. LEHMAN moved to lay the amendment on the table.
The yeas and nays being demanded and taken, resulted--yeas 41, nays 51.
So the motion to lay on the table failed.
Mr. MIERS moved to strike out the first Tuesday in March, 1879, and insert in lieu the first Monday in April, 1880.
The SPEAKER stated that parliamentary rule requires the question shall be taken upon the longest time first, consequently the question recurs on filling the blank with the first Monday in April, 1880.
The yeas and nays being demanded and taken, resulted--yeas 41, nays 53.
So Mr. Miers' amendment did not prevail.
Mr. TULLEY made an ineffectual effort to adjourn--yeas 20, nays 74.
Mr. TAYLOR, of Warrick, moved to amend by inserting the second Tuesday in October, 1879, and demanded the yeas and nays on his amendment.
Mr. OVERMEYER demanded the previous question, which was seconded by the House and under its operation the House rejected the amendment of Mr. Taylor by yeas 18, nays 75.
Mr. MIERS moved that the further consideration of the bill and amendments be postponed and made the special order for next Tuesday at, 10 o'clock a. m.
The SPEAKER ruled the motion out of order under the operation of the previous question.
Mr. MIERS and Mr. TULLEY appealed from the decision of the chair--Mr. Miers subsequently withdrew his appeal.
Mr. LEHMAN moved to adjourn.
The yeas and nays being demanded and taken, resulted--yeas 41, nays 53.
So the House refused to adjourn.
The question the recurred upon Mr. Overmeyer's amendment for the first Tuesday in March, 1879.
The yeas and nays being demanded and taken, resulted--yeas 50, nays 43, as follows--
Yeas--Arnold of Blackford, Arnold of Wabash, Barker, Bearss, Brown of Steuben, Bryant, Campbell, Carey, Carter, Connaway, Conner, Copeland, Cunningham, Donnell, Drake, Fancher, Faulkner, Golden, Gordon, Herod, Hess, Hopkins, Hubbard, Kelly, Kirkpatrick, Lindley, Major, March,Messick, Overmeyer, Owen, Reed, Robeson, Rodman, Robinson, Rooker, Shanks, Skinner, Sleeth, Snoody, Stevens, Taylor of Lagrange, Thayer, Thompson, Thornburg, Vanpelt, Vawter, Watson, Wimmer, Works--total, 50
Nays--Alden, Allen, Blockley, Briggs, Brown of Jasper, Caldwell, Compton, Confer, Daily, Denton, Davidson, Davis, Drover, Edwins, English, Galbraith, Garroutte, Ginz, Lehman, Miers, Mitchell, Nave, Osborn of Elkhart, Osborn of Vermillion, Perry, Reicheldafer, Scholl, Schweitzer, Shauck, Shields, Stucker, Taylor of Daviess, Taylor of Warwick, Tulley, Van Valzah, Willard, Speaker Cauthorne--total, 43.
And so Mr. Overmeyer's amendment was agreed to.
Mr. OVERMEYER moved that the bill be engrossed.
The House then took a recess until 2 o'clock.
The SPEAKER resumed at 2 o'clock, and announced the unfinished business, being Mr. Overmeyer's motion for the engrossment of the bill [H. R. 421].
Mr. HUMPHREYS moved that the bill be recommitted to the
Mr. OVERMEYER claimed that it was not competent for any committee to change the date
as fixed by the House this morning. Then why recommitt? This bill is nearly identical
with the bill that submitted the Wabash and Erie canal amendment to the people in
1873. It is competent for this Legislature to fix the time for submitting these
amendments. There is no need that this bill should go to the
Mr. OSBORNE of Elkhart would submit amendments if he had an opportunity. He objected to the form of the ticket for the reason that it would confuse the voter and most likely force them to vote on all yes or no, without knowing the meaning of No. 1, 2, 3, etc., of the amendments. He favored the printing of the amendments in full upon the ballot, so that the people may vote intelligently. He was opposed to the bill in its present shape.
Under the operation of the previous question the yeas and nays were demanded on the
motion to refer and being taken resulted--yeas 49, nays 43, so the bill was referred
to the
Mr. OVERMEYER then moved that the committee be instructed to return the bill to the House to-morrow.
The motion was agreed to.
Mr. GORDON moved for an order to employ a stenographer for the
Mr. WILLIARD offered an amendment which was accepted, that the committee report the cost of said stenographer, before engaged, to the House.
The motion, as amended, was agreed to.
Mr. HANDY introduced a bill [H. R. 456] for an act to require certain Gravel, McAdamized and Plank road companies to whom was relinquished the right of the State in the so-called National and Cumberland road to finish, complete and keep the same in repair, within a certain time, which was read the first time and passed to the second reading.
Mr. Reed introduced a bill [H. R. 457] to amend section 6 of an act to divide the State into circuits for Judicial purposes, which was read the first time and passed to the second reading.
A communication from the Auditor showing that the telegraph companies make returns to county officials of their lines except the L. N. A. and C. R. R. Co., who claim their line as a part of their property.
A concurrent resolution from the Senate allowing the same pay as last session to the employes of the Senate, was concurred in.
Also a concurrently resolution from the Senate that all printing paper, stationery, etc., used by officers or employes of this session shall be ordered through the State printing board; the auditor of state is authorized to issue his warrant therefor and charge the same to the general appropriation bill.
The yeas and nays were demanded upon the resolution, and being taken resulted--years 53, nays 36.
So the resolution was concurred in.
Also a concurrent resolution of the Senate No. 7, for instruction to congressmen to favor a national law requiring the plaintiff in all cases where judgments are rendered in the Federal courts against persons resident in this State to cause a brief memorandum of the judgment to be sent to the clerk of the Circuit court of the county, etc.
The resolution was concurred in.
Also a Senate concurrent resolution No. 2, requesting our representatives in Congress to use their influence for the passage of the bill now pending before the U. S. Senate regulating inter-state commerce.
The resolution was concurred in.
Engrossed Senate bill 138, in relation to
congressional, township school funds, etc., was read the second time and referred to
the
Also the bill [S. 58] concerning prisoners in
jail, was read the second time and referred to the
Also the bill [S. 30] to authorize guardians
to settle the estate of deceased wards, was read the second time and referred to the
Also the bill [S. 71] to authorize justices of
the peace to require additional replevin bail in cases where insufficient bail has
been taken, etc., was read the second time and referred to the
Also the bill [S. 101] to authorize the
formation of companies for the construction of water work,etc., was read the second
time and referred to the
Also the bill [S. 125] for the punishment of
persons in possession of stolen property was referred to the
Also the bill [S. 192] to amend section 468 of
The bill [H. R.140] to legalize the annexation of land to cities and towns, was read the third time, and under the operation of the previous question the bill passed the House of Representatives by yeas 87, nays 3.
The bill [H. R. 15] to legalize the election held in the year 1878, in the town of Edinburg, and to legalize the acts of its officers, was read the third time and passed the House of Representatives by yeas 80, nays 1.
Mr. Herod offered a resolution, which was adopted, authorizing the pay of $3 per day to Thomas McDaniels, heretofore appointed by the doorkeeper to look after the heating of the hall.
The
The report was concurred in.
The bill [H. R. 14] to amend section one of an act to provide for the incorporation of public cemeteries, and to provide for their maintenance and additions thereto, the collection of assessments, and election of officers, was read the third time and passed the House of Representatives--yeas 88, nays 0.
The House then adjourned until 10 o'clock to-morrow.
After prayer by Rev. Mr. Hinkley, of the New church--
On motion of Mr. HARRIS, the reading of the minutes of yesterday's proceedings was dispensed with.
Mr REEVE Introduced a bill [S. 363] to consolidate certain funds [$15,197 96] belonging
to the school fund into one non-negotiable bond, which was read the first time and
referred, to the
On motion by Mr. DONHAM, the bill [H. R. 140] to legalize annexation of certain lands in Terre Haute was read the first time.
On motion by Mr. WOOLLEN, the bill [S. 60]--Mr. Wilson's, concerning the 6th, 7th, 44th and 45th sections of the circuit court act--making an exchange of judicial districts for the counties of Switzerland and Scott, was read the second time and ordered engrossed.
On motion of Mr. TRAYLOR, the bill, [S. 80 Mr. Kramer's] to abolish assessors and treasurers in town and cities, and to provide for the election of town marshals by the voters thereof, was read the second time. Mr. SARNIGHAUSEN and Mr. HARRIS desired to reserve the right to offer an amendment excluding the cities of Indianapolis and Fort Wayne from the provisions, of the bill, if they deem it advisable at a future day.
Mr. KRAMER, believed the more senators consulted with their constituents the more anxious would they be for the passage of this bill. It would save a great expense to the taxpayers which is now borne unnecessarily by the present plan of paying two sets of officials to do the same work.
Mr. REEVE moved to amend so that in cities and towns the assessment of township assessor may constitute the assessment. Imperative legislation for municipalities has been the means of so many of them becoming so largely in debt. Fifty men sitting here should not attempt to dictate to 3,000, 10,000, 20,000 or 40,000 people in any city or town. He hoped the bill would not pass in its present shape.
Mr. HARRISON--On 278th page of the 1st statutes will be found the law under which cities are operating. He would abide by the judgment of the Council of the city he represents in this matter, as soon as advised thereof.
Mr. KRAMER thought the amendment would practically destroy the object of his bill. He believed the provisions of the bill to be a good one. Why should the city duplicates show $50,000,000 and the county duplicate $40,000,000? There is no use of hiring men twice for doing the same work. If senators think their cities should be excluded from the provisions of the bill, he would not seriously object.
Mr. WINTERBOTHAM thought the bill would save the town where he resides $1,000 or more annually. In times like these it is the duty of senators to vote for any measure that will relieve the tax-payer. He opposed the amendment.
Mr. WOODS: The office of city assessor is utterly useless, and undoubtedly should, be abolished. In nine eases out of ten he goes to the county assessor's books and copies the assessment therefrom. He hoped the amendment would be rejected, and the bill passed in its present shape,
Mr. WOOLLEN was decidedly in favor of this bill, regarding it as a measure much desired by many of his constituents.
Mr. URMSTON favored the provision authorizing the adoption of the county or township assessment, for cities and towns. While there may be a necessity for cities to have an assessor, there is no necessity for towns having an assessor.
Mr. TRAYLOR was not able to say whether the bill ought to apply to cities or not, but he opposed the amendment because it will give towns the right to elect assessors, of which privilege many of them would be sure to avail themselves, and thereby keep up this useless expense. He also favored the election of marshals by the voters of the town. In his town the town assessor copies from the county assessor's books, and is well paid therefor.
Mr. REEVE had heard nothing against the
Mr. BURRELL moved to reject the amendment, which motion, under the operation of the previous question demanded by Mr. VIEHE, was agreed to by--yeas 23, nays 15.
The bill was then ordered engrossed for the third reading.
On motion by Mr. COMSTOCK his bill [S. 280] affecting his locality with reference to township libraries and taxes for their support, was read the second time with a committee amendment increasing the tax from one to five cents on the one hundred dollars, which was agreed to by consent, and the bill ordered engrossed for the third reading by--yeas 30, nays 9. It will apply only in cases where a private library of the value of $1,000 or over has been donated for public purposes. In such cases the township trustee may levy a tax for its maintenance. The only locality known to the affected by this bill is in the district represented by the author.
On motion by Mr. LEEPER the
Some fifty or sixty bills were returned from committees with reports thereon, which were severally placed on the files of the Senate without reading, under a custom sprung up this session, which is to erated by unanimous consent.
Several leaves of absence were asked and obtained for senators until Monday and Tuesday.
The Senate took a recess till 2 o'clock p. m.
On motion by Mr. HARRIS the Senate proceeded to consider the
Mr. KRAMER moved to amend section 4 by providing that the excess of interest "over six per cent." shall be deemed usurous and illegal.
Mr. COMSTOCK thought the amendment should be agreed to.
Mr. STRElGHT did not want to force people having money to loan to call in the services of a third party--a broker--through which loans must be negotiated, or a go between who will sell notes in order to get a greater rate of interest than the law allows.
Mr. TRAYLOR favored the amendment.
Mr. REEVE resisted the adoption of the amendment. The place for a penalty is on the criminal side of the statute. In this case it will amount to nothing but a bid for men to commit crime, and pay disrespect to the law. The penalty should be fixed in the shape of a misdemeanor.
Mr. DICE thought the amendment should be adopted to preserve the consistency of the bill, and make it definite and clear.
Mr. KRAMER insisted there ought to be a penalty clearly set forth for taking usurious interest.
Mr. WILSON offered a substitute declaring that a person taking usurious interest shall forfeit all interest.
Mr. V1EHE opposed it.
It was rejected and the amendment (Mr. Kramer's) was adopted.
Mr. REEVE--Under this nobody can commit an offense without some one to help, and he saw no justice in punishing one altogether and letting the other go free.
Mr. V1EHE insisted the section was just right as it is.
Mr. DICE moved to strike out of the 9th section ail that refers to the public funds.
Mr. VIEHE opposed the amendment, preferring the section as it stands.
Mr. STRAIGHT favored the amendment.
Mr. GARRIGUS hoped the Senate would be consistent on this subject. The State has possession of nearly four millions of dollars for which the State pays six per cent., and is it reasonable to say individuals shall not stand on the common basis?
Mr. WINTERBOTHAM thought this would give a dangerous discretion to county officers, that it would allow them to loan to some at a less rate than to others. He hoped the amendment would be rejected.
The amendment was rejected.
The bill as amended was passed the second reading by yeas 37, nays 1.
Pending the roll call--
Mr. DICE, when his name was called, said he desired to explain his vote. He was not in favor of any interest law at all, upon principle. The Legislature might as well attempt to regulate the price of corn or wheat, or any other commodity, but believing a large majority of the people he had the honor to represent are in favor of a six per cent. interest law, he voted steadily all the time in favor of a six per cent. law. He was here to represent their wishes, and not being able to get a six per cent law, he would vote for the next least rate, and therefore voted "aye."
Mr. TRAYLOR, when his name was called, desired to say in explanation of his vote, that it has always been a question with him as to whether there ought to be any interest laws at all. As the rate has heretofore been established at the rate of eight per cent. and from the fact that every $900 out of $1,000 in his co. is loaned ad six per cent., which was enough he voted yesterday for six per cent.; yet, as it seems to be the views of a majority of the members or the Senate that it would be right to contend for a higher rate than six per cent., he was anxious to vote for the next best thing, and as that is this bill, he would vote "aye."
The vote was then announced as above recorded.
So the bill passed the second reading.
On motion of Mr. LANGDON the constitutional rule was dispensed with--yeas 37, nays 3--the bill read the third and last time, and finally passed the Senate by yeas 37, nays 1.
Pending the roll call--
Mr. KRAMER, when his name was called, said he came here with the intention of voting for a law regulating the rate of interest at six per cent , believing three-fourths of the people of this State want a law cutting the rate of interest down to six per cent., but seeing no prospect whatever in this Senate to get the reduction of the rate of interest lower than eight per cent., and believing that half a loaf is better than no bread, he voted "aye."
Mr. REEVE, when his name was called, said, protesting against the whole bill, he voted "aye."
Mr. STREIGHT, in explanation of his vote, when his name was called, said, believing
the
The result of the vote was then announced as above recorded.
So the bill finally passed the Senate, making the legal rate six per cent., with eight per cent. on contracts, judgments to bear same rate as contract.
On motion by Mr. SARNIGHAUSEN the bill, [S. 136--Mr. Dice's] to regulate the use of human bodies for the purposes of dissection, was taken up, read the second time, and ordered engrossed for the third reading.
Mr. STREIGHT offered the following:
Resolved, That the
At the author's instance it lies on the table for the present.
On motion by Mr. HARRIS his bill, [S. 131] for the election of a police judge in cities having a voting population of over 16,000, was read the second time and lays on the table with the consent of the author.
The following described bills for acts were introduced, read the first time, and severally referred to appropriate committees:
By Mr. LANGDON, by request, [S. 364] for the vacation or sale of a portion of the public square in the town of Fremont, Steuben county.
By Mr. PETERSON, [S. 365] to amend sec. 3 and repeal sec. 4 of the act of March 10, 1873, for relief of the Lye Creek Draining association.
By Mr. KAHLO, [S. 366] to give laborers or mechanics a first or prior lien upon any property owned by their employers, whether a corporation or individuals.
By Mr. KRAMER, [S. 367] amendatory and supplementary to acts amendatory to assessment of property acts:--having special reference to insurance agents, and to compel them to keep accounts of all applications taken in this State for companies without the State, and reducing the tax to 2 1/2 on the $100, and that agents shall report to county treasurers all losses paid and the amount of business every two months, the county treasurer to report to the state auditor.
Then the Senate adjourned.
The SPEAKER called the House to order, the session being opened with prayer by the representative from Hendricks county [Mr. SNODDY.]
The reading of the journal of yesterday's proceedings was read until--
On motion of Mr. SCHWEITZER the further reading was dispensed with.
The
The report of the committee was agreed to.
Mr. OVERMEYER, moved that the bill be considered engrossed and put upon its passage, and demanded the yeas and nays thereon.
Mr. OSBORNE of Elkhart stood committed to the propriety of these amendments, but under the present status of the bill he was compelled to oppose its passage. He was opposed to burdening the people with the expense of a special election. He thought the people were unprepared to vote intelligently upon these amendments for the reason that they had not time to consider them. He hoped that the bill would be defeated in its present shape.
Mr. SLEETH thought the public mind fully prepared to vote intelligently, and insisted that the question should go to them as soon as possible. The question of economy prompted him to favor a speedy verdict from the people.
The yeas and nays being ordered and taken, resulted--yeas 50, nays 46.
So the bill was considered engrossed, and read the third time,
The question being, Shall the bill pass?
Mr. OVERMEYER thought the cost of a special election would be less in March next, the time fixed in the bill, than to have these elections in 1880. Ho was of the opinion that if this House was disposed to harry important measures of this kind, there would be time enough to give due notice of the election. Should the bill be passed now, it can be in the Senate by 3 o'clock this afternoon, and read the first time to-day, and on Monday could be passed that body and be submitted to the Governor of the State for his approval. The people had discussed the matter a long time, and were well informed upon the subject matter of these proposed amendments, and were as well prepared to vote upon them now as at any future time. He gave it as his judgment that there would be a full vote.
Under our present constitution we are unable to do any effectual work upon the subject of fees and salaries of county officers; and members well know that this was a subject the people are much agitated about, and demand relief, and this Legislature should give the people themselves a chance to incorporate into the organic law of their State a constitutional measure that will enable the Legislature to give them the relief they desire in this particular. He insisted that the bill now pending should pass without delay.
Mr. LEHMAN demanded the previous question, and under its operations the House of Representatives failed to pass the bill for the want of a constitutional majority--yeas 48, nays 46, as follows:
Yeas--Messrs. Arnold, of Blackford, Arnold, of Wabash, Bearss, Brown, of Steuben, Bryant, Campbell, Carey, Carter, Connoway, Conner,Copeland, Davis, Donnell,Fancher,Golden, Gordon, Herod, Hess, Hopkins, Hubbard, Kelly, Lindley, Major, March, Messick, Osborn, of Vermillion, Overmeyer, Owen, Reed, Robeson, Rodman, Robinson, Rooker, Saint, Shanks, Skinner, Sleeth, Snoddy, Stephens, Taylor, of Lagrauge, Thayer, Thornburg, Vawter, Watson, Wimmer, Works, Speaker Cauthorn, H. S.--48.
Nays--Messrs. Allen, Allen, Baker, Barker, Blockley, Briggs, Brown of Jasper,
Caldwell, Compton, Confer, Cunningham, Daly, Dalton, Davidson, Drake, Drover,
Edwins, English, Faulkner, Flodder, Gilbraith, Garroutte, Ginz, Handy, Hart,
Hosmer, Humphreys, Huthsteiner, Kester, Lehman, Mires, Mitchell,Nave, Perry,
Scholl, Schweitzer, Shauck, Shields, Stucker, Taylor of Davis, Taylor of Warrick,
Pending the roll call
Mr. SAINT, when his name was called, in explanation, said the vote he was about to give would be different from nearly all those of his party just cast. It was nevertheless consistent with what he had said and done on this subject. He voted against the constitutional amendments from principle, and gave this reason at the time, but a majority of this House having decided that they should be submitted to the people he did not see how he stultified himself, as had been intimated he would do, by voting for this resolution, fixing March 4 ensuing as the time for said election. It is not true that an election then will cost the State more money than in April or October, l880; for in the former case a special session of the General Assembly must be called to carry out the legislation proposed in said amendments, admitting, as any one must, that at least one or more of these amendments will be ratified by the people, and especially the one changing the October elections to November, and if that is ratified, the amount saved will be much larger than the expense of a March election. Certainly there was no inconsistency in voting for an early submission of a question that a majority hay decided against us, shall and ought to be submitted.
Again, he found that among those who were the most hearty, if not the most numerous, in their congratulations of his vote originally given against the submission of said amendments, were the county officers from various portions of the State, showing conclusively that those who are in the enjoyment of high salaries and fees, are a unit almost in opposing the whole thing. Knowing that his constituents were demanding a reduction of the enormous fees and perquisites of public officers, and believing that it can be most successfully done under an amended constitution, and that it should be done at once, he voted "aye."
Mr. THOMPSON, in explanation of his vote when his name was called, said he was op posed to the first constitutional amendment because it disfranchises poor men. He thought it never ought to be submitted to the people. Whenever poor mechanics and laborers are living in tenement houses in small wards of cities and precincts of towns, the owners of the tenement houses can, under this amendment, disfranchise their tenants by ordering them to move within the 30 days preceding the election. Poor men have hardships and troubles enough already, without adding to the galling yoke of want and domestic distress, the incomparable misery of political disfranchisement. We come as members of this House largely by the votes of poor laboring men who do not own homes, but who are as honest and as deeply interested in political results as the richest in the land. We promised these poor men that we would legislate for them; that we would preserve their liberties and enlarge their opportunities, he made this promise in good faith, and should keep it sacredly by voting against this bill, and against ail other bills aimed at the dearest object of the poor man's political desire, a free and perfect liberty at the ballot box. He could not stultify himself by voting t submit in this way. Members in the Democratic party who voted with the Republicans for these amendments then said there was no party or politics in the mutter. Now they suddenly see great political significance in the passage of this bill. He stood by his political conscience, and no party could force him to smother it. He voted "no."
The result of the vote was then announced as above recorded.
So the bill failed for want of a constitutional majority of 51 votes.
The
Pending the consideration of the report from the committee, the House took a recess for dinner.
The SPEAKER resumed at 2 o'clock, and stated the question being upon concurrence in the report of the committee on the bill [H. R. 340] for legislative apportionment of the State.
After ineffectual motions to lay the report on the table, the yeas and nays were demand- ed and being taken--upon concurring in the report of the committee--resulted--yeas 43, nays 49.
Pending the roll call--
Mr. SAINT, when his name was called, in explanation of his vote, said he was opposed to vote for any measure that would disfranchise himself or his friends, and, believing that another district could be formed that would do justice to his people, he voted "no."
Mr. WILLARD, in explanation of his vote, when his name was called, said he could not I vote for this bill because he believed it unjust. He said he came here pledged to a fair apportionment, and believing this bill would work an injury to any party fostering it. He, therefore, voted "no."
The result was then announced as above recorded. So the report was rejected.
The clerk, by order of the speaker, read the bill by sections, each section being approved, unless objection was made,
After a few minor amendments and numerous ineffectual efforts to amend, interspersed with several calls of the House and motions to adjourn, which prolonged the session till 7 o'clock.
Mr. ENGLISH moved to strike out all after a certain line indicated and insert matter, the same as reported from the committee.
Mr. HUMPHREYS demanded the previous question, which was seconded by the House, and under its operations the amendment was agreed to by--yeas 49, nays 27--as follows:
Yeas--Messrs. Alden, Allen, Baker, Barker, Blockley, Briggs, Brown of Jasper, Bryant, Caldwell, Compton, Confer, Dailey, Dalton, Davidson, Drake, Drover, Edwins, English, Faulkner, Galbraith, Ginz, Handy, Hart, Humphreys, Huthsteiner, Kester, Lehman, Major, Miers, Mitchell, Nave, Osborn of Elkhart, Perry, Reicheldarfer, Rooker, Saint, Scholl, Schweitzer, Shauck, Shields, Stucker, Taylor of Daviess, Taylor of Warrick, Thompson, Tulley, Vanpelt, Van Valzah, Wimmer, Works, Speaker Cauthorn, H. S.--49.
Nays--Messrs. Bearss, Brown of Steuben, Campbell, Carey, Connaway, Connor, Copelaud, Donnell, Fancher, Golden, Hess, Kelly, Lindley, March, Messick, Overmeyer, Reed, Rodman, Robinson, Shanks, Sleeth, Snoddy, Taylor of Lagrange, Thayer, Thornburg, Vawter, Watson--27.
The bill was ordered engrossed.
And then the House adjourned.
The LIEUTENANT GOVERNOR being out of the city.
On motion by Mr. SARNIGHAUSEN, Mr. Reily took the chair.
After prayer by Rev. Mr. HINKLEY of the Swedenborg church.
On motion by Mr. COMSTOCK, the reading of yesterday's minutes was dispensed, with.
Mr. SHIRK presented a petition against exorbitant rates of toll; also from the yearly meeting of Friends praying for a revision of the present prison system. He said the memorialists have examined the bill introduced by the senator from Laporte (Mr. Winterbotham) and approved its provisions and ask that it be passed.
Mr. TRUSLER presented a petition from the Indiana Historical Society, praying for the passage of a law prohibiting the killing of quails for five years. Also, from the State Board of Agriculture to the same purport.
Mr. RAGAN presented a petition, which was referred to the
On motion by Mr. VIEHE, the bill, [H. R. 140] legalizing certain proceedings relating to the annexation of certain towns to the city of Terre Haute, was read the second time, and a favorable report from a committee concurred in.
Mr. WINTERBOTHAM from the
Mr. VIEHE moved to amend by adding a resolution that the action of the Senate in purchasing, revised statutes is also ratified, but said statutes shall be the property of the State.
The amendment was agreed to, and the resolution as amended adopted.
On motion it was--
Ordered that when the Senate adjourn it adjourn until Monday at 2 o'clock p. m.
Mr. Ragan gave notice that on Monday next he should move to change the morning hour of meeting from 10 o'clock to 9 o'clock.
The following described bills for acts were introduced, read the first time, and severally referred to appropriate committees:
By Mr. FREIGHT, [S. 368] for regulating the transportation of freight on and over railroads--making it unlawful to charge any greater compensation per car load of similar freight for n shorter than for a longer distance in one continuous carriage.
By Mr. Wilson, for Mr. HART, [S.369] to amend section. 315 of the general practice act of June 18, 1852, as amended by an act approved March 9, 1861--by adding a proviso that when complaint is filed the plaintiff may fix the day for trial, etc., after ten days' personal service,etc.
By Mr. GRUBBS, [S. 370] to amend section 527 of the general practice act of June 18, 1852 the time for restoring mutilated, records burned or destroyed shall not be computed in the ten years restoration.
By Mr. FOWLER, [S. 371] concerning the transportation of freight and passengers over railroads in the state--shall charge for transporting freight not exceeding 20 miles nor more than 100 per cent. above the rates fixed for the entire line. Not more than 50 miles a rate not exceeding 75 per cent. For a greater distance than 50 miles not exceeding 50 per cent. Passenger fare shall not exceed the rate of three cents per miles.
By Mr. WINTERBOTHAM by request, [S. 372] to provide for the redemption of property of non-residents if the same has been sold for taxes by any city or county treasury.
By Mr. WINTERBOTHAM for Mr. BURRELL (who was in the chair) [S. 373] providing for a
state board of engineers, consisting of three machinists engineers by the Governor,
with the consent of the Senate, to serve tour years, whose duty it shall be to
annually visit
By Mr. POINDEXTER, by request, [S. 374] to amend the charter of the town of Clarksville.
By Mr. DAVIS (S. 375] authorizing the adoption of John T. Campbell's road system.
By Mr. DICE. [S. 376] by request, to provide the statutes of the State of Indiana for justices of the peace--by the commissioners of each county.
By Mr. LANGDON, [S. 377] to amend section 782 of the general practice act of June 18, 1852, so as to keep alive certain actions by appropriately inserting the words "except where the action has been commenced be ore and is pending at the time of the death," and adding to the section these words, "and malicious prosecution."
By Mr. COFFEY, by request, [S. 378] to legalize the official acts of the several boards of trustees of Elizabethtown, Ind.
Pending the order for the introduction of bills.--
Mr. LANGDON gave notice that on Tuesday, the 10th day of February, 1879, he should move to amend the rules by adding to rule 49 these words: "Nor shall any rule be suspended except by a vote of at least two-thirds of the members present."
On motion, by Mr. COMSTOCK, the vote of yesterday afternoon ordering the engrossment of his bill [S. 280] in relation to public libraries, was reconsidered, the tax authorized; herein to be levied by township trustees for the maintenance of such libraries was reduced from five to two cents on the $100 valuation, and the bill, as amended, was ordered to be engrossed for the third reading.
On motion by Mr. GARRIGUS the bill [S. 17--Mr. Kent's]to enable the owners of wet lands to drain and reclaim the same was taken up.
Mr. KENT stated that the report of the committee recommends striking out all after the enacting clause and inserting new matter. He suggested it unnecessary to read anything except the substituted bill as embodied in the report of the committee.
The report of the committee being read--
Mr. REEVE said he would not submit with the few members present to patting that bill on its second reading now. He moved its further consideration be postponed till Monday, and that 200 copies be printed.
Mr. KENT has had this matter of preparing a drainage law under consideration for a long time, with the senator from Howard [Mr. Garrigus] They had called to their assistance some of the best tale;t in the State, and he was not mistaken in saying this substitute would make the best drainage law ever drafted in Indiana. It provides against all possible contingencies, and he was very anxious it should become a law. One reason he was asking early action on this substitute is that it has been submitted to the House committee, and members of that committee desire the Senate shall take action on this bill that they may have the benefit thereof. He had no objection to the pending motion if the bill be taken up at 2 o'clock Monday.
The motion [Mr. Reeve's] was agreed to.
And the Senate adjourned, under the order above set forth, till Monday at 2 o'clock p. m.
The SPEAKER called to order--prayer was omitted.
The reading of the journal was ordered and proceeded with until--
On the motion of Mr. LEHMAN the further reading was suspended.
The SPEAKER then proceeded with the call by counties for the introduction of bills, resolutions, etc.
The following bills for acts were introduced, read the first time, and passed to the second reading.
By Mr. DONNELL, [H. R. 458] to limit the time for beginning actions for the recovery of real estate purporting to be conveyed by married women.
By Mr. RECHELDAFER [H. R. 459] to legalize the act of the board of commissioners of Allen county and the act of the common council in file city of Fort Wayne, in relation to annexation of real estate thereto.
By Mr. RECHELDAFER [H. R. 460] to amend section 2 of an act in relation to the opening and widening of streets and alleys.
Mr. CAMPBELL, by request, [H. R. 461] for an act regulating the practice of medicine--practioners shall possess a diploma. If not a graduate, shall pass an examination before the State board of health.
By Mr. CAMPBELL [H. R. 462] to repeal an act to establish a superior court in Cass county, and to create the twenty-ninth and thirty ninth judicial circuit, and fixing a time for the holding of the courts therein.
Mr. CARTER one red a resolution authorizing the
Mr. JORDON moved to amend by adding that the said committee shall first report to this House the terms upon which he may be employed.
Mr. MIERS moved to amend by striking out the name and inserting the name of some competent person.
Mr. FAULKNER suggested the name of the representative from Clark.
Mr. Miers' amendment was adopted.
Mr. Jordon's amendment was also adopted.
The resolution as amended was then rejected.
Mr. SAINT offered a resolution adding the name of Mr. Carter to the prison committee.
Mr. TULLEY moved to amend the resolution by adding another name to the committee, so that the number may be uneven.
Mr. MIERS, with all due deference, thought Mr. Carter ought not be a member of the committee, bat ought to be invited to go along. Mr. Carter had already committed himself, and therefore, was not qualified to sit as a juryman. The committee ought to have Mr. Carter as a witness.
Mr. SAINT: Mr. Carter has denied that he knows or any crookedness.
Mr. WILLARD insisted that as the proposition proposes to change the rules it must lie over for one day.
Mr TULLEY moved to further amend so that the Speaker should appoint another member.
Mr. SAINT accepted the amendment.
The resolution, as amended, was then adopted.
The SPEAKER thereupon added Mr. Willard to the committee.
Mr. CARTER disclaimed any knowledge of anything wrong in the management of the prison affairs.
By Mr. HART, [H. R. 463] to exempt $500 of
Mr. MARCH offered a resolution, which was adopted, that the
By Mr. MARCH, [H. R. 464] to amend section two and three of an act defining who are persons of unsound mind.
By Mr. CAREY, [H. R. 465] to amend section eight of act to prevent fraudulent and illegal voting, approved May 13, 1869.
By Mr. CAREY, [H. R. 466] authorizing and empowering Boards of County Commissioners to make appropriations for the relief of their respective county in certain cases.
By Mr. DAVIDSON, [H. R. 467] to amend section 18 of an act of May 14, 1852, regulating decedents estates and the apportionment of estates.
By Mr. HUMPHREYS, [H. R. 468] to cheapen the cost of textbooks, and to prevent too frequent changes in the common school books.
By Mr. HANDY, [H. R. 469] to prohibit the sale of transfer of county orders where the person holding the same owe taxes.
By Mr. HANDY, [H. R. 470] defining certain rights of parties litigation and some of the duties of judges, etc., limiting arguments, etc.
By Mr. LINDLEY, [H. R. 471] to enable owners of wet lands to drain the same when it can not be done without injury to adjacent lands.
By Mr. LINDLEY, [H. R. 472] fixing the number and defining the jurisdiction of justices of the peace.
By Mr. VANPELT, [H. R. 473] to legalize errors and imperfection in the description in articles of association in the organization of turnpike, gravel, and macadamized roads, etc.,
By Mr. KIRKPATRICK, [H. R. 474] to amend section 19 of act of May 29, 1875, prescribing the power of justices of the peace in State prosecutions.
By Mr. KIRKPATRICK, [H. R. 475] to authorize boards of county commissioners to purchase lands on which to hold county fairs--not to exceed 40 acres--provided the title shall be in the county, and subject to the order of the commissioners.
By Mr. LEHMAN, by request, [H. R. 476] to punish the embezzlement of railroad tickets.
By Mr. LEHMAN, [H. R. 477] to define and punish the crime of burglary and house-breaking.
By Mr. LEHMAN, [H. R. 478] to amend section 24 of an act of June 10, 1852, defining felonies.
Mr. LEHMAN, offered a resolution that when the House adjourned it adjourn until Monday at 2 o'clock p.m.
The resolution was rejected.
By Mr. VAWTER, [H. R. 479] to amend section 3 of an act of June 1, 1852, providing for the organization of county boards.
Mr. OVERMEYER offered a resolution, which was adopted, that the committee on ways and means be required to investigate and report upon matters connected with the building of the new Insane Asylum, so as to inform the House how much money has been spent in the erection, how much money will be required to complete the asylum; what was the original estimate as to cost at the time the contract was made; what changes, if any, have been made in the original plan that have increased the expense, and who is responsible for such changes and increased expense; and said committee shall have power to send for persons and papers.
By Mr. OVERMEYER, [H. R. 480] to amend section 13 of an act of June 15, 1852, to establish and regulate ferries--defining a misdemeanor.
By Mr. THAYER, [H. R. 481] to protect a homestead in certain cases--40 acres and improvements or one lot in town or city and improvements.
By Mr. FANCHER, [H. R. 482] prescribing what kind of judgment shall be rendered in cases of suits to recover damages for the injury of trees.
By Mr. EDWINS, [H. R. 483] to amend sections 647, 648, and 650 of the general practice act of June 18, 1852.
By Mr. EDWINS, [H. R. 484] to prohibit school teachers for expelling scholars from common schools for want of a special text book.
By Mr. SAINT, [H. R. 485] to amend section 49 of an act to provide for a uniform of assessment of taxes, etc., approved December 21, 1872.
By Mr. ENGLISH, [H. R. 486] to divide the State into congressional districts.
By Mr. WILLIARD, [H. R. 487] for the vacation of public squares in certain cases, and providing for the disposition of said squares in certain cases.
By Mr. WILLIARD, [H. R. 488] to amend section 569 of the general practice act of June, 1852.
By Mr. ROBINSON, [H. R. 489] to authorize the erection of county work houses, and commitments thereto, etc.
Mr. GORDON offered a resolution which was adopted, that the committee on prisons be requested to inquire what became of the money for which the bricks in the old penitentiary were sold.
The House then took a recess until 2 o'clock p. m.
By Mr. STUCKER, [H. R. 490] to make additional provision for the change of venue in superior, criminal and circuit courts.
By Mr. STUCKER, [H. R. 491] to explain and define the general act in relation to the distribution and use of the common school fund.
By Mr. STUCKER, [H. R. 492] to amend section 53 of an act to provide for a uniform assessment of taxes, approved December 21, 1852.
By Mr. BEARSS, [H. R. 493] to prevent breechy animals from running at large.
By Mr. HEROD, [H. R. 494] for the relief of Joel S. Davis of Bartholomew county.
By Mr. SHAUCK, [H. R. 495] to repeal the act exempting from taxation certain lands taxed for city purposes, approved March 13, 1877.
By Mr. OSBORNE of Elkhart, [H. R. 497] to amend section 466 of the general practice act.
By Mr. OSBORNE of Elkhart, [H. R. 498] to amend the 65th and 66th section of the decendent' estates act, approved February 20, 1855.
By Mr. OSBORNE of Elkhart, [H. R. 499] to amend section 336 of the general practice act of June 18,1852.
Mr. OSBORNE of Elkhart, offered a resolution that no further leaves of absence be allowed members, except for sickness, and that the excuses shall be written.
The resolution was adopted.
By Mr. WORKS, [H. R. 500] to amend section 51, 66, and 67 of the act for the qualification of justices for the peace, approved June 9, 1852.
By Mr. ALLEN of Putnam, [H. R. 501] to repeal sections 1, 2, and 3 of an act supplementary to an act to provide for a uniform assessment of taxes, etc., approved March 13, 1875.
By Mr. ALLEN of Putnam, [H. R. 502] to amend section 1 of an act excepting certain
By Mr. BLOCKLEY, [H. R. 503] prohibiting certain domestic animals From running at large.
By Mr. STUCKER, [H. R. 504]to authorize the governor to appoint the officers of the benevolent and reformatory institutions of the State. .
By Mr STUCKER, [H. R. 505] to protect the purity and freedom of elections, and defining violations of the election law?
By Mr. KELLY, [H. R. 506] regulating loans of the congressional school fund so as to prevent county officers from taking separate mortgages for each fund when the sum loaned is made up of funds from one township.
By Mr. KELLY, [H. R. 507] requiring guardians, etc., to file receipts for taxes before discharge.
By Mr. KESTER [H. R. 508] to legalize sales made to satisfy mortgages to the school fund in certain cases.
Mr. SLEETH offered a resolution, which was adopted, inquiring of the Attorney General what legislation, if any, is necessary to protect the State's interest in the Fair grounds.
By Mr. VAN VALZAH,[H. R. 509] to provide for the redemption of real property of foreign corporations after the same has been sold for taxes by any city or county Treasurer.
By Mr. MESSICK, [H. R. 510] regulating the number of hours per day that convicts in the State prisons may be required to work--[10 hours.]
By Mr. Taylor of Warrick, [H. R. 511] to fix the times of holding courts in the Second Judicial Circuit and prescribing the length of term.
By Mr. TULLY, [H. R. 512] defining the manner in which certain lands and other property within the limits of any city or incorporated town may be taxed for corporation.
By Mr. TULLY, [H. R. 513] to provide for redistricting incorporated towns and providing the manner of electing certain officers thereof and prescribing their duties and powers, and providing the manner they shall exercise the same.
By Mr. TULLY, [H. R. 514] to amend sections 26 and 61 of an act to repeal all general laws now in force for the incorporation of cities, and to provide for the incorporation of cities, presenting their powers and rights and the manner in which they shall exercise the same, and to regulate such matters as properly pertain thereto--approved March 14, 1869.
By Mr. TULLY, [H. R. 515] to legalize a certain contract heretofore made between the board of county commissioners of White county and the school trustees of the town of Monticello, White comity, and legalizing the acts of the county auditor and treasurer of said county in issuing the orders and paying the same under the contract.
Mr. TULLY offered a resolution of inquiry into the feasability of trustees taking the enumeration of school children; which was sent to the Committee.
By Mr. WILLARD, [H. R. 516] to amend section one of an act entitled an act to amend sections one and three of an act to provide for the relocation of county seats and for the erection of public buildings in counties in case of such relocation--approved March 2nd, 1855.
By Mr. WATSON, [H. R. 517] defining the crime of abortion or miscarriage, fixing penalty therefor.
By Mr. WATSON, [H. R. 518] supplemental to an act regulating the granting of divorces, multiplication of marriages and decrees, and orders of courts incident thereto--approved March 10,1873.
By Mr. Watson, [H. R. 519] to amend section 9 of an act to authorize and regulate the incorporation of banks of discount and deposit approved Feb. 7,1873.
Mr. HEROD offered a resolution to furnish the chairman of the
By Mr. SAINT, [H. R. 520] so that nine jurors shall be competent to render a verdict.
The SPEAKER then took up the order of bills on their second reading.
The following described bills were read the second time and referred to appropriate committees, unless otherwise stated:
The bill [H. R. 392] establishing a militia for the State of Indiana.
The bill [H. R. 455] to transfer the Interest of the State in the Antietam National cemetery to the United States. It was ordered to be engrossed.
The bill [H. R. 437] to authorize township trustees to furnish books for school children.
The bill [H. R. 456] to require certain gravel, macadamized and plank road companies, to whom was relinquished the right of the State to finish, complete and keep in repair, as required by charter, within a certain time.
The bill [H. R. 415] for an act to regulate the sale of liquors.
The bill [H. R. 447] to authorize farmers' fire insurance companies.
The bill [H. R. 336] to regulate fees and salaries.
The bill [H. R. 448] to amend an act to discourage the keeping of useless and sheep-killing dogs.
The bill [H. R. 449] to limit the power of cities of 30,000 inhabitants to contract for water and gas.
The bill [H. R. 458] to prohibit the incorporating of the dissenting opinion of judges in the Indiana Reports.
The bill [H. R. 451] to provide for the running at large of certain domestic animals.
The bill [H. R. 452] for a congressional apportionment.
The bill [H. R. 453] to amend sec. 2 of an act for the election and appointment of supervisors. It was ordered engrossed.
Mr. Herod offered a resolution that the
Mr. SLEETH moved to amend by adding a book-keeper if it shall need one. The amendment was accepted and the resolution adopted.
Mr. EDWINS moved that the bill [H. R. 215] be taken from the table and referred to
The motion was agreed to.
The following described bills for acts were introduced, read the first time and severally passed to the second reading.
By Mr. SLEETH, [H. R. 521] applying the doctrine and rules of estoppel as established, known and practiced under the common law to married women and minors of the years of discretion.
By Mr. M1TCHELL, [H. R. 522] for the better security of the public funds.
By Mr. MITCHELL, [H. R. 523] declaring agreements to pay attorneys' fees null and void.
By Mr. MARCH, [H. R. 524] to amend the 96th section of the general practice act, approved June 17,1852.
And then the House adjourned.
In the absence of the LIEUTENANT GOVERNOR the Senator from Jackson (Mr. Burrell) took the chair and called the Senate to order, under authority from the Lieutenant Governor, who, by telegraphing from his home in Union City, exercised his right to name any Senator to perform the duties of the chair for a time not extending beyond an adjournment.
Prayers were uttered by Rev. J. O. McCullough, pastor of the Plymouth Congregational church, of this city.
The PRESIDING OFFICER directed the reading of the Secretary' minutes of Saturday' proceedings. But they were not at hand, whereupon on motion of Mr. KENT the reading of the Journal was dispensed with for the present. He then moved that the Senate proceed to the consideration of the special order--being his bill [S. 17] to enable the owners of wet lands to drain and redrain the same where it can not be done without affecting the rights of others.
The motion was agreed to.
Mr. KENT also moved that the report of the committee thereon be concurred in. He said there was an absolute necessity for a good law on this subject. He gave a review of the history of legislation on this subject in the past few years. He would be willing to see the law of 1875 repealed, but it may be of advantage where ditches are to be made of the length of three miles or over. The major part of the first section is the same as the law of 1867. This section differs, however, where reference is made to the owners, by declaring the transfers are first evidence. Section four is an innovation on the law of 1867. It is intended to drain the entire water shed for a distance of three miles, at ordinary stages. Section 10 makes the engineer the sufficient judge as to the capacity of the ditch where completed. Section 11 is similar to the law of 1867, as also are sections 13, 14, and 15, and from section 16 and on the bill is different. In a short space of time ditches are usually clogged or destroyed, and a drainage law would be a failure without some provisions to keep the ditches in repairs, and so the remainder of the bill makes ample and just provisions in that direction. The assessments for keeping up repairs should be in proportion to the benefits, as this bill provides. This drainage act ought to pass. The committee has given to it more than usual thought and consideration. He hoped the report would be concurred in.
Mr. STREIGHT hoped this matter will not be pressed to-day. A few years ago a drainage law was passed, that cost a large amount of money to get the people out of its meshes under advantage, taken by speculators. This is a long bill, and senators should have more time for its consideration.
Mr. REEVE wished the Senate to take such steps as would be fair to the author of the
bill, and to all concerned. By an implied understanding made last Saturday, this bill
should be considered by the Senate this afternoon, as it author desires leave of absence
for several days from to-night. He called attention to this bill as being the fairest
drainage law ever presented in this State--inimical though it be. The bill starts out by
giving power to any "who may be interested" to rob the owners of the State, by
getting up a job. The veriest brain talent enough, is of course "interested" enough to
get up a plan for ditching which can not be done without affecting the rights of others.
He defied any man to put together in language such an immaculate set of absurdities as
are contained in the first section of this bill. It proposes to assess benefits and
damages to something that has not existence. Can you put your finger upon an instance
where you can step in and take possession of another man's property without giving the
owner notice? No where. Yet in this bill there may be proceedings had fastening a lien
upon a man's land without the owner having a chance to be heard for a single
moment. The first notice the owner has under this bill is to appear and see the
assessment made. How grand and
Mr. MENZIES: Has the General Assembly the constitutional power and authority to pass this bill? If not, any further consideration is a waste of time. Has the General Assembly the right to confer on any citizen the power to appropriate property of other citizens for private uses? To get around this difficulty these words are put in this bill, "or when the same shall be of public utility, and be conducive to the public health," well knowing without them it could not stand before this Senate an hour. But these words can not bring this bill within the right of eminent domain. The State can not take the property of the citizen without compensation The public benefit is something that goes to the whole community, and is something that has to be kept up by the public. A public improvement must be kept open by public taxation. If this bill calls for a ditch that is not to be a public ditch, then there can be no authority given to infringe on private property. He read from legal authorities to sustain his position. Here is an attempt to infringe on a cherished right, put in every bill of rights in this country, that you cannot take private property for private uses. The senator from Marshall (Mr. Reeve) did not characterize this bill too strongly when he said it bordered on the infamous. When he had concluded.--
On motion by Mr. KENT the further consideration of this bill and pending report thereon, from the committee on swamp lands, was made the special order for this day week at 2 o'clock p. m.
And then the Senate adjourned.
The SPEAKER [Hon. Henry S. Cauthorne, of Knox county] called the House to order, and stated the reading of the journal would be deferred until the afternoon session, and that bills on their 2nd reading would be taken up and advanced on the calendar.
The following described bills for acts were introduced, read the first time and severally passed to the second reading.
By Mr. MIERS, [H. R. 525] for an act to amend sections 2, 3, 5, 11, 16 and 26 of an act fixing the fees and salaries of the officers therein named, and prescribing their duties.
By Mr. FAULKNER, [H. R. 528] to amend sections 8 and 46 of an act to divide the State into judicial circuits--approved March 6, 1873,
Mr. FAULKNER offered a resolution which was adopted, that the judiciary return the bill [H. R. 317] defining defamation of character, with or without amendments.
The SPEAKER (Mr. Handy in the chair) offered petitions signed by numerous citizens of Weidner township, Knox county, praying for the passage of the following described bill:
By the SPEAKER (Hon. H. S. Cauthorne), [H. R. 527] for an act for the relief of sureties of Thos. F. Chamber, trustee of Weidner township, Knox county.
By Mr. MEARS, [H. R. 528] to amend section 1 of an act to define the salary of the governor-- $4,000.
By Mr. PERRY, [H. R. 529] to provide for the reappraisement and sale of lands forfeited to the State common school fund.
By Mr. CONNER, [H. R. 530] to prevent the sale of liquors on fair grounds.
By Mr. CONNER, [H. R. 531] to amend an act to encourage agriculture fairs--county commissioners may purchase lands for county fairs, not to exceed in cost $5,000.
By Mr. GORDON, [H. R. 532] to amend section three of an act to render taxation for common schools uniform, and to provide for the education of colored children in the common schools--colored children shall have equal privileges with other children.
By Mr. GORDON. [H. R. 533] for an act to amend section 573 of the general practice act.
By Mr. GORDON, [H. R. 534] for an act providing for a constitutional convention--to take the sense of the people on the subject in 1880.
By Mr. GORDON [H. R. 535] for an act to regulate the practice of medicine, in midwifery and surgery.
Mr. GORDON offered a joint resolution, which was referred to the committee on federal relation, requesting our senators and representatives in Congress to use their influence for the passage of an act which shall effectually prohibit the conferring upon the same person the office of the clerk of the district court, and that of clerk of the circuit court, in any district of the United States, and which shall effectually prohibit any circuit or district court of the United States, or judge thereof, from appointing any clerk of either of said courts to the office or trust of master in chancery, or master commissioner in any matter pending in either of said courts, and providing that said several appointments and offices shall in no case be held or exercised by the same incumbent.
By Mr. WILLIARD, [H. R. 536] to create a bureau of statistics.
By Mr. WILLIARD, [H. R. 537] to amend section 13 of an act providing for the organization of circuit courts.
Mr. Shanks offered the following resolution, which was referred to the
Whereas the following facts are true:
Resolved, That the committee on ways and means be hereby required to inquire into the expedience of providing by law for the issue of bonds of the State bearing a rate of interest not exceeding five per cent. per annum. payable by installments, fixed at times to meet the income revenues from taxes levied and to be levied for the purpose of building said State House. Said bonds to be sold at not less than par; to be sold by the State officers, and without commission, and the proceeds thereof to be applied to the construction of the new State House and for no other purpose whatever.
The following bills were read the second time and referred to appropriate committees unless otherwise stated:
Mr. Reed's, [H. R. 457] to amend section 6 of an act to divide the State into circuits for judicial purposes.
Mr. Donnell's, [H. R. 458] to limit the time for beginning action for the recovery of real estate purporting to be conveyed by married women.
Mr. Reicheldafer's, [H. R. 459] to legalize the act of the board of commissioners of Allen county, and the acts of the common council in the city of Fort Wayne, in relation to annexation of real estate thereto.
Mr. Reicheldafer's, [H. R. 460] to amend section 2 of an act in relation to the opening and widening of streets and alleys.
Mr. Campbell's, by request, [H. R. 461] for an act regulating the practice of medicine--practitioners shall possess a diploma. If not a graduate shall pass an examination before the State board of health.
Mr. Campbell's,[H. R. 462] to repeal an act to establish a superior court in Cass county, and to create the twenty-ninth and thirty-ninth judicial circuit, and fixing a time for the holding of the courts therein.
Mr. Hart's, [H. R. 463] to exempt $500 of property from taxation belonging to persons over 70 years of age.
Mr. March's, [H. R. 464] to amend section 2 and 3 of an act defining who are persons of unsound mind.
Mr. Carey's, [H. R. 465] to amend section 8 of an act to prevent fraudulent and illegal voting, approved May 13, 1869.
Mr. Carey's, [H. R. 466] authorizing and empowering boards of county commissioners to make appropriations for the relief of their respective counties in certain cases.
Mr. Davidson's, [H. R. 467] to amend section 18 of an act of May 14, 1852, regulating decedent's estates, and the apportionment of estates.
Mr. HEROD offered an amendment, which was referred with the bill, without reading.
Mr. Humphrey's, [H. R. 468] to cheapen the cost of textbooks, and to prevent too frequent changes in the common school books.
It was referred to a special committee of five, consisting of Messrs. Conner, Humphreys, Miers, Dailey and Shanks.
Mr. Handy's [H. R. 469] To prohibit the sale or transfer of county orders where the persons holding the same owe taxes.
Mr. Handy's [H. R. 470:] Defining certain rights of parties litigant, and some of the duties of judges, etc., limiting argument, etc.
Mr. Lindley's [H. R. 471:] To enable owners of wetlands to drain the same when it can not be done without injury to adjacent lands.
Mr. Lindley's [H. R. 472:] Fixing the number and defining the jurisdiction of justices of the peace.
Mr. Vanpelt's [H. R. 473:] To legalize errors and imperfections in the description in articles of association in the organization of turnpike, gravel, and macadamized roads, etc.
Mr. Kirkpatrick's [H. R. 474:] To amend section 19 of an act of May 29, 1875, prescribing the power of justices of the peace in State prosecutions.
Mr. Kirkpatrick's [H. R. 475:] To authorize boards of county commissioners to purchase lands on which to hold county fairs--not to exceed forty acres--provided the title shall be in the county, and subject to the order of the commissioners.
Mr. Lehman's (by request) [H. R. 476:] To punish the embezzlement of railroad tickets.
Mr. Lehman's, [H. R. 477:] To define and punish the crime of burglary and housebreaking.
Mr. Lehman's, [H. R. 478:] To amend section 24 of act of June 10, 1852, defining felonies.
Mr. Vawter's, [H. R. 479:] to amend section 13 of an act of June 15, 1852, providing for the organization of county boards.
Mr. Overmyer's, [H. R. 480] to amend section 13 of an act of June 15, 1852, to establish and regulate ferries--defining a misdemeanor.
Mr. Thayer's, [H. R. 481] to protect a homestead in certain cases--40 acres and improvements or one lot in town or city and improvements.
Mr. Fancher's, [H. R. 482] prescribing what kind of judgment shall be rendered in cases of suits to recover damages for the injury of trees.
Mr. Edwin's,[H. R. 483] to amend sections 647, 648, and 650 of the general practice act of June 18,1852.
Mr. Edwin's, [H. R. 484] to prohibit school teachers from expelling scholars from common schools for want of a special textbook.
Mr. Saint's, [H. R. 485] to amend section 49 of an act to provide for a uniform assessment of taxes, etc., approved December 21,1872.
Mr. English's, [H. R. 486] to divide the State into congressional districts.
Mr. Willard's,[H. R. 487] for the vacation of public squares in certain cases.
Mr. Willard's, [H. R. 488] to amend section 569 of the general practice act of June 18,1852.
Mr. Robinson's [H. R. 489] to authorize the erection of county workhouses and commitments thereto, etc.,
Mr. Stucker's, [H. R. 490] To make additional provisions for the change of venue in superior, criminal and circuit courts.
Mr. Stucker's, [H. R. 491:] To explain and define the general act in relation to the distribution and use of the common school fund.
Mr. Stucker's,[H. R. 492:] To amend section 53 of an act to provide for a uniform assessment of taxes, approved December 21, 1852.
Mr. Bearss', [H. R. 493:] To prevent breechy animals from running at large.
Mr. Herod's, [H. R. 494:] For the relief of Joel S. Davis, of Bartholomew county.
Mr. Shauck's, [H. R. 495:] To repeal the act
Mr. Osborn's bill, of Elkhart, H. R. 498: For an act concerning decedents' estates.
Mr. Osborn's, of Elkhart, [H. R. 497:] To amend section 466 of the general practice act.
Mr. Osborn's, of Elkhart, H. R. 498: To amend the 65th and 66th section of the decedents' estates act, approved February 20, 1865.
On motion by Mr. Osborn, of Elkhart, these bills just ascribed, were severally ordered engrossed for the third reading.
Mr. Osborn's of Elkhart [H. R. 495:] To amend section 336 of the general practice act of June 18, 1852.
Mr. Works' [H. R.500:] To amend sections 51, 66 and 67 of the act for the qualification of justices of the peace, approved June 9,1852.
Mr. Allen's of Putnam [H. R. 501 :] To repeal sections 1, 2 and 3 of an act supplementary to an act to provide for a uniform assessment of taxes, etc., approved March 13,187.
Mr. Allen's of Putnam [H. R. 502:] To amend section 1 or an act excepting certain lands therein described from taxation for city or town purposes, etc., approved March 13, 1877.
Mr. Blockley's [H. R. 503:] Prohibiting certain domestic animals from running at large.
Mr. Stucker's [H. R. 504:] To authorize the governor to appoint the officers of the benevolent, and reformatory institutions of the State.
Mr. Stucker's [H. R. 505:] To protect the purity and freedom of elections, and defining violations of the election laws.
Mr. Kelly's [H. R. 506:] Regulating loans of the Congressional school fund so as to prevent county officers from taking separate mortgages for each fund when the sum loaned is made up of funds from one township
Mr. Kelly's [H. R. 507:] Requiring guardians, etc., to file receipts for taxes before discharge.
Mr. Kester's [H. R. 508:] To legalize sales made to satisfy mortgages to the school fund in certain cases.
Mr. Van Valzah's [H. R. 509:] To provide for the redemption of real property of foreign corporations after the same has been sold for taxes by city or county treasurer.
Mr. Messick's [H. R. 510:] Regulating the number of hours per day that convicts in the State prisons may be required to work--10 hours.
Mr. Taylor's, of Warwick [H. R. 511:] To fix the times of holding courts in the Second judicial circuit, and prescribing the length of term.
Mr. Tulley's [H. R. 512:] Defining the manner in which certain lands and other property within the limits of any city or incorporated town may be taxed for corporation purposes.
Mr. Tulley's, [H. R. 513:] To provide for redistricting incorporated towns, and providing the manner of electing certain officers thereof and prescribing their duties and powers.
Mr. Tulley's, [H. R. 514:] To amend sections 26 and 61 of an act to repeal all general laws now in force for the incorporation of cities, and to provide for the incorporation of cities, prescribing their powers and rights, and the manner in which they shall exercise the same, approved March 14, 1867.
Mr Tulley's, [H. R. 515:] To legalize a certain contract heretofore made between the board of county commissioners of White county and the school trustees of the town of Monticello.
Mr. Williard's, [H. R. 516:] To amend an act for the relocation of county seats, and for the erection of public buildings, approved March 2, 1855.
Mr. Watson's, [H. R. 517:] Defining the crime of abortion or miscarriage.
Mr. Watson's, [H. R. 518:] Regulating the granting of divorces.
Mr. Watson's, [H. R. 519:] Regulating the incorporation of banks of discount.
Mr. Saint's, [H. R. 520:] So that nine juror shall be competent to render a verdict.
Mr. Sleeth's, [H. R. 521:] Applying the doctrine and rules of estopple as established, known and practiced under the common law, to married women and minors of the years of discretion.
Mr. Mitchell's, [H. R. 522:] For the better security of the public funds.
Mr. Mitchell's,[H. R. 523:] Declaring agreements to pay attorneys' fees null and void.
Mr. March's, [H. R. 524:] To amend the 66th section of the general practice act, approved June 17,1852.
The following described bills were introduced, read the first time, and severally passed to the second reading.
By Mr. HEROD, [H. R. 538] supplemental to an act providing for a general system of common schools in cities of 30,000 or more inhabitants; and for the election of a board of school commissioners.
By Mr. HEROD [H. R. 539] to amend section five of an act authorizing the appointment of short-hand reporters for certain courts of record in this state.
The House then took the usual recess for dinner.
The SPEAKER ordered the reading of the journal of Saturday's proceedings.
The journal was being read when--
On the motion of Mr. LEHMAN the further reading was dispensed with.
Mr. LEHMAN offered a resolution,which was adopted, calling for the copies of the governor's message that were ordered printed in the German language, soon after the delivery of the message, and which had failed to reach the House of Representatives.
Mr. BRIGGS introduced a bill, [H. R. 540] for an act to amend section eighteen of an act to provide for the opening, vacating and change of highways--approved June 17,1852.
By Mr. BEARSS, [H. R. 541] for an act to prescribe rules of evidence in actions to set assde conveyances of real estate on the ground of fraud.
The calender being clear and [evidently no quorum present] the House adjourned until to-morrow at 10 o'clock a. m.
The LIEUTENANT GOVERNOR took the chair. Prayers were uttered by Rev MYRON W. REED, of the Third Presbyterian church
Mr. FOWLER offered a resolution, which was adopted, authorizing the committee on benevolent institutions to send for persons and papers. Also, a resolution requesting officers of all benevolent and reformatory institutions to furnish a list of employes, their compensation,whether relatives of any person in authority, etc., which was also adopted.
On motion, by Mr. HARRIS, the Senate proceeded to the consideration of Senate bills on the second reading:
The bill [S. 12--Mr. Harris'] concerning the trial of civil causes in circuit and superior courts, was read the second time.
Mr. HARRIS explained: This bill simply provides that any party to a civil suit may, before the argument begins, tender to the court what he thinks to be the law in writing, and the court indicates whether it shall be given; it so, the lawyer can say to the jury, "The law in this case is" so and so. It gives this advantage where there is a dispute as to what the law really is, that dispute may be settled in advance of the argument. This provision is taken from the law of Kentucky, where any party demanding it may have ail the questions of law decided before argument.
Mr BURRELL objected to the bill because it leaves the court to decide, from the written instructions submitted, as to which shall be the law that shall govern that case. That is an innovation which ought not to be made.
Mr. VIEHE thought the bill gave sufficient latitude--the court could hear argument if it wished; if not it would not be worth while to argue. The bill is right just as it is.
On motion by Mr. HARRIS his bill was ordered engrossed for the third reading.
The bill [S. 14. Mr. Kahlo's] to legalize the annexation of certain territory to the town of Logansport was read the second time, with a favorable report from a special committe, substituting a new bill, which was numbered S. 379, with the same title.
Mr. REEVE; This bill embodies an important question: As to the right of the Legislature to cure not only simply defective acts of municipal corporations, but the right to make a law now which would have the same force and effect had there been no defective legislation or act on the part of the corporation. If this Legislature adopt this bill and it becomes a law it is a declaration that the Legislature may pass an expost facto law--a law impairing the obligation of contract, and declaring that to be legal which never had any existence in fact or in law--that it may pass a law divesting vested rights, and that it may assume jurisdiction over that which a co-ordinate branch of the Government has already decided adversely. These questions must be decided by the Senate, if this report be concurred in. Retroactive legislation is admissable to the extent where power is conferred upon a subordinate which attempts to exercise that power in a way which is defective; but if in attempting to exercise that power it exercises a power never granted, it not is within the reach of curative statutes. Be then presented to the Senate a statement of the facts surrounding the cases affected by this bill. Mr. R made a long speech in opposition to this class of curative legislation, warning members against retroactive bills in general, and all propositions that may in the remotest manner affect vested rights.
Mr. VIEHE, being a member of the committee to which this bill was referred, felt it a duty to say a few words in behalf of the relief sought for. Of late years legalizing bills have become entirely too frequent in the Legislature, still there are cases where it is eminently proper that a legalizing bill should be passed. He then gave a statement of the facts in the cases affected by this bill, in one of which he contended the local authorities had sufficient power to act, though imperfectly done, and save reasons which induced him to support the bill under consideration.
Mr. HEFRON opposed the cutoms of corporations coining before the General Assembly to
settle their lawsuits of course there are many eases where equity demands that curative
acts shall be passed; but Legislatures
Mr. KAHLO declared the passage of this bill was in accordance with the wishes of the entire people of his county, with the exception of not more, perhaps, than 20 persons, principally men owning large tracts of lands effected. Unless this bill is passed the city will be left in a bad condition pecuniarily, as there is an indebtedness of about $400,000 hanging over it.
Mr. TREAT understood the act passed two years ago exempting from taxation for city purposes farming lands within the boundaries of incorporated towns, was intended to meet such cases, and that some of these parties desired to get rid of taxes assess prior to the passage of this act.
Mr. HARRIS inquired of the special committee which made this report, if the court at Logansport, has pronounced judgment in this case?
Mr. V1EHE, a member of the committee referred to, was understood to say that the validity of this annexation was not involved in a case passed upon by the court.
Mr. REEVE, in his seal, was understood to say the court was to have rendered judgment in this case last Saturday.
Mr. HARRIS was not in favor of the passage of legalizing acts as a general thing, but if the people residing on this territory have considered themselves as part of the city of Logansport, and have received benefits thereby, and have sent a representative to the common council, they should be included as part of the city, and be would vote to concur in the report of the committee.
Mr. STREIGHT stated the custom to be where special legislation is asked for by any member for his particular locality, it is generally granted because it is supposed their immediate representative is advised as to what his people want; and in that view of the case he proposed to vote with the senator from Cass (Mr. Kahlo) on this bill.
Mr. DICE--Senators should consider first where we have the right to legalize acts of the authorities of the city of Logansport, and secondly, if we have the power, whether it is expedient to do so. As the first question, he called attention to numerous acts that have heretofore been passed legalizing actions of incorporations throughout the State. The supreme court has in numerous instances declared that the Legislature has the power absolutely to legalize even void acts. He quoted authorities to sustain his position. He understood that his trouble to arise from a mistake, and gave reasons why he thought it expedient to pass this bill as a matter of just and right.
The motion to refer to the
The report, of the committee was concurred in by yeas 32, nays 12, and the bill
referred to the
The Senate took a recess till 2 o'clock p. m.
Mr. FOWLER, gave notice that on Thursday at 10 o'clock a. m. he should move to amend rule 15 so it shall read: "No senator, shall speak more than twice on the same question without leave of the Senate, nor more than once unti1 every member choosing to speak shall have spoken; and no senator snail speak more than ten minutes upon any proposition with out leave of the Senate."
Mr. FOSTER offered a resolution referring to the charges in the Indianapolis Daily Journal of the 7th inst. against the principal secretary of the Senate; declaring that certain senators believe him unworthy the confidence of the Senate, and appointing Messrs. Foster, Woollen and Harris a committee to investigate the charges and report the result of their investigation to the Senate at the earliest possible moment.
On the motion of Mr. V1EHE it was laid on the table by--yeas 22, nays 21.
Mr. COFFEY'S court bill [S. 19] and the bill [S. 20--Mr. Grubb's] to remove legal disabilities from married women--were indefinitely postponed, the latter being embraced in another bill heretofore reported favorably upon.
The bill [S. 16--Mr. Dice's] in reference to changes of venue in cases of preliminary examinations for felony, was read the second time and ordered engrossed; as was also the bill [S.22--Mr.Foster's] to legalize acts of trustees of the town of New Haven.
The bill [S.23--Mr. Shaffer's] to legalize certain acts of the town of Huntington, was read the second time, with a favorable report from a committee, which was concurred in after considerable debate, by--yeas 29, nays 13.
The bill [S. 25--Mr. Reiley's] to amend section 1 of the superior act of March 5, 1877, was read the second time.
Mr. TRUSLER said bill S. 187 covers all in this bill, and as it was preferable he would like to see this one laid on the table. He made that motion.
It was agreed to.
The bill [S.33--Mr. Comstock's] to abolish the April election was read a second time with a committee report recommending indefinite postponement. The report was concurred in by yeas 30, nays 15.
The bill [S. 10--Mr. Dice's] fixing the mileage and per diem of members add
employes of the Assembly was read a second time with a majority report from the
On motion by Mr. GRUBBS his bill [S.34] providing for voluntary assignments of real and personal property, in trust for the benefit of creditors by insolvents, providing in what manner and in what cases a discharge may be granted to such insolvent, was taken from the table, and on his further motion the Senate agreed to consider it by sections.
The first section was agreed to by consent.
Messrs. Reeve, Fowler and Streight spoke in opposition, and Mr. Grubbs in favor of the bill.
Mr. LANGDON opposed the motion to indefinite postponement. There are defects in the present assignment law, and this Legislature could do no better work than to overhaul the statute.
Mr. V1EHE--There may be some objections to this bill that ought to be sustained, but there are some good features in it, and, consequently, he was opposed to indefinitely postponing it. This bill provides that a person who receives a dividend shall release his claim. Such an important bill as this should not be postponed indefinitely. This is not a bankrupt law, as it has been characterized on this floor. When a debtor is hopelessly involved, it is for the public good that his assets should be distributed among his creditors.
Mr. HARRIS--This motion means, if sustained, that we will indefinitely postpone the
whole subject of State assignment law. Our present law is very deficient. The courts
can not tell what it means sometimes, and a good deal of litigation grows out of its
uncertainty. Let us take this bill up, section by section, and let us perfect a bill
that will not be made use of as a cloak to cover up fraud. What a man
Mr. MENZIES insisted that the Legislature has no power to give a discharge to a debtor. The only chance Congress has to override vested rights is through the passage of a bankrupt law. In deference to the author who has given so much thought to this bill, the pending motion ought not to prevail.
Mr. GRUBBS asked for his bill the calm and deliberate consideration of the Senate. It was by far more perfect than the existing law.
Mr WOOLLEN thought it would be the proper thing to submit this bill to a special committee of three lawyers, with instructions to incite it the basis of changing the present assignment law leaving out the discharge feature. He made that motion--Mr. Streight withdrawing his motion for that purpose.
Mr. REEVE characterized the present assignment law as perfect, and subject only to the usual legal technicalities: and did not think any three lawyers here could improve on its provisions. He suggested the special committee be further instructed to report what defects they can find in the present law.
On motion of Mr. FOSTER, the whole subject was laid on the table and made the special order for Friday at 10 o'clock a. m.
And then the Senate adjourned.
The SPEAKER called the House to order and announced that the session this morning would be opened with prayer by the representative from Hendricks, Mr. SNODDY.
The journal of yesterday's proceedings was read until--
On the motion of Mr. HESS the further reading was dispensed with.
The House then proceeded with the regular order being the call for reports from committees.
were submitted and concurred in unless otherwise stated as follows:
The
Also the bill [H. R. 406] to encourage sheep husbandry--with a substitute recommending its passage--any dog unaccompanied with owner is declared a nuisance and may be destroyed.
Mr. STEVENS was opposed to the bill, because it did not give the man a right to kill the dog when in the company of its owner, whether the dog was guilty or not.
The committee withdrew the bill.
The committee on cities and towns returned the bill [H. R. 12] to legalize the acts of the town of Seymour, recommending that the bill do pass. It was ordered engrossed.
Also the bill [H. R. 402] for improvements in streets or alleys, with a recommendation that it do pass. It was ordered engrossed.
Also the bill [H. R. 45] to legalise the assessment of incorporate towns, recommending indefinite postponement.
Also the bill [H. R. 245] defining the powers and duties of boards of trustees of incorporated towns, recommending indefinite postponement.
Also the bill [H. R. 192] to legalize the official act of the Common Council of the town of Butler, DeKalb county, recommending passage. It was ordered engrossed.
Also the bill [H. R. 202] authorizing incorporate towns to exact license for the sate of intoxicating liquors, with a recommendation that the bill do pass. It was ordered engrossed.
Also, the bill [H. R. 201] towns may assess taxes for sale of intoxicating liquors, recommending indefinite postponement.
Also, the bill [H. R. 326] exempting certain lands in towns and cities, recommending indefinite postponement.
The
Also, the bill [H. R. 317] in relation to plank and other toll roads,recommending its passage. It was ordered to the engrossment.
Also, the bill [H. R. 64] to provide for preserving the public highways, recommending its indefinite postponement.
The
Mr. LEHMAN moved that the report be referred to the
The
It also reported the papers in the contested election case of Wm. B. Seward vs. R. W. Miers, with a unanimous report that the Hon. R. W. Miers is entitled to hold his seat.
The report was concurred in without debate.
The
Also the bill [H. R. 158] in relation to settlements made by county commissioners, with amendments, and when so amended they recommend its passage. It was ordered engrossed.
Also the bill [H. R. 132] to provided for settlement of decendents estates, recommending passage. It was ordered engrossed.
Also the bill [H. R. 38] concerning breechy animals and partition fences, with a recommendation that the bill pass. It was ordered engrossed.
Also the bill [H. R. 214] defining certain misdemeanors, recommending passage. The bill repeals the provoke law. It was ordered engrossed.
Also the bill [H. R. 58] declaring against attorneys' fees in notes, etc., with a recommendation that it do pass. It was ordered engrossed.
Also the bill [H. R. 126] touching foreign corporations, with amendments, and when so amended the bill do pass. It provides against foreign insurance companies carrying the claims to the United States courts. It allows them the same rights as other citizens. It was ordered engrossed.
Mr. GORDON introduced a bill [H. R. 542] touching the boarding of prisoners in the county jail who are imprisoned for offences against the State--30 cents a day in cities of more than 30,000 inhabitants, 40 cents a day in smaller counties.
On the motion of Mr. SHANKS the constitutional rule was suspended and the bill read the second time.
On the motion of Mr. JORDAN, the bill was referred to the
The House by consent agreed to hear the president of the Illinois institution for feeble minded children for half an hour after adjournment this evening.
And the House took a recess for dinner.
The SPEAKER resumed at 2 o'clock and proceeded with the call for reports from committees.
Reports were received and concurred in, unless otherwise stated, as follows:
The
Also the bill [H. R. 131] for an amendment to the general practice act, with a recommendation that the bill do pass. It was engrossed.
Also the bill [H. R. 39] to amend the act for the appointment of Supervisors of Roads, with a recommendation that it pass. It was ordered engrossed.
Also the bill [H. R. 88] defining vagrancy, with a recommendation that the bill pass. It was ordered engrossed.
Also the bill [H. R. 126] concerning evidence in libel and slander, recommending passage. It was ordered engrossed.
Also the bill [H. R. 188] to regulate fire insurance companies, with amendment and when so amended that it do pass. It was ordered engrossed.
Also the bill [H. R. 172] declaring the ineligibility of supervisors of high ways, recommending passage. It was ordered engrossed.
Also the bill [H. R. 30] concerning the alienation of property, with amendment, and when so amended that the bill do pass. It was ordered engrossed.
Also the bill [H. R. 168] to authorize cities and towns to issue bonds, with amendments, and when so amended recommended its passage. It was ordered engrossed.
Also the bill [H. R. 107] to amend the act for the election and qualification of justices of the peace, recommending its passage. It was ordered engrossed.
Also the bill [H. R. 32] in relation to prosecution of felonies, with amendments, and when so amended the bill do pass. It was ordered engrossed.
Also the bill [H. R. 238] to amend section 647 of the general practice act, with amendments, and when so amended that the bill do pass. It was ordered to the engrossment.
Also the bill [H. R. 5] regulating the number of grand jurors, with a recommendation that the bill be registered. A minority report was also submitted with an amendment and a recommendation that the bill do pass Any man a freeholder or a householder may act as a grand juror.
Mr. FAULKNER said this was his bill, and he was entirely opposed to property qualifications, and for this reason introduced the bill.
Mr. OVERMEYER moved that the reports lie on the table.
Mr. BRIGGS demanded a division of the question.
The question being upon the adoption of the minority report.
The yeas and nays were demanded, and being taken upon laying the minority report upon the table resulted--yeas 20, nays 56.
So the minority report does not lay on the table.
The majority report was then laid upon the table.
Mr. THOMPSON moved that the majority report be indefinitely postponed.
The yeas and nays being taken resulted--yeas 22, nays 52.
So the minority report was not indefinitely postponed.
The minority report was then adopted, and the bill ordered engrossed.
The
Also the bill [H. R. 75] to limit appeals to the Supreme Court, with a recommendation that the bill do pass. Less than $200 can not be appealed to the Supreme Court.
Mr. BRIGGS moved to amend so that the party shall first file his or her affidavit that he or she has a meritorious cause of action, and that the appeal is not taken merely for delay.
Mr. SAINT said he was opposed to the amendment, for the reason that there was not one party in a hundred to any cause but what will readily make an affidavit, upon the suggestion of his attorney, that his cause is a meritorious one, and whereby defeat the object of this bill, which is to diminish the large number of unimportant appeals to the Supreme Court. He regarded this as one of the most important bills that will come before this body, and will go far toward remedying a very great and growing evil in our judicial system, if this amendment fail and the bill passes. To limit all appeals to cases where the amount in controversy is $200 or over, will relieve our supreme court of a large amount of unnecessary labor. It seemed to him it would cost more than the amount recovered to appeal, where the amount was less than $200, and would leave more time for the judges to devote to the consideration of more important cases; therefore he was opposed to the amendment, and hoped the bill, as reported, would pass. He would vote to concur in the report of committee.
The amendment was rejected, and the bill was ordered engrossed.
The
Also, the bill [H. R. 351] to authorize justices of the peace to appoint substitutes with amendments, and when so amended that the same do pass. It was ordered engrossed.
Also, the bill [H. R. 356] to amend sec. 64 of an act for the election and qualification of justices of the peace, with a recommendation that it be indefinitely postponed.
Also, the bill [H. R. 367] to limit the number and increase the jurisdiction of justices of the peace with a recommendation that the bill do pass.
Mr MARCH moved to amend in section two by striking out four and inserting $500.
The amendment was agreed to.
Mr. KIRKPATRICK proposed an amendment, by striking out the word "two" and insert "one" justice. The object was to provide the township with one justice, instead of two.
Mr. LINDLEY moved an amendment to the amendment "where the population does not exceed 2,000 voters." The amendment to the amendment was rejected.
The amendment was agreed to.
Mr. HESS moved to reconsider the vote just taken, adopting the amendment of Mr. Kirkpatrick.
The motion to reconsider was objected, and the bill ordered to the engrossment.
The House then adjourned.
Prayer by Rev. Mr. Jones, of the Sixth Street M. E. church of this city.
Mr. FOWLER introduced a bill [S. 382] to provide
for the government of the Hospital for the Insane, and providing for the admission of
persons thereto, both curable and incurable, which was referred to the
The order of business for Wednesday, under the rules, being the consideration of bills on the third and last reading in the Senate--
The bill [S. 6, Mr. Sarnighausen's] legalizing acts of ex-notaries public, was read the third time, and finally passed the Senate by yeas 43, nays 2.
On motion by Mr. SARNIGHAUSEN the bill [S. 136, Mr. Dice's] in relation to the use of human bodies for the purpose of dissection was read the third time and finally passed the Senate.
The bill [S. 9, Mr. Sarnighausen's fully described in these reports of Feb. 4.] to promote the success of medicine and surgery by furnishing subjects for anatomical dissection, was read the third time.
Mr. TRUSLER was conscientiously opposed to the passage of this bill, and he believed nine out of every ten of the voters of this State will be opposed to it. He would vote against it for the further reason that it proposes to furnish subjects for the dissecting knife from the poor and unfortunate class of our fellow-citizens. These poor creatures, so unfortunate as to have to live and die in the poor house is enough of sorrow for them without the addition of a statute who will say that when they die their bodies shall become public property and turned over to the tender mercies of the dissecting knife. Then he opposed the bill be cause it would establish a dissecting room in every county in the State. If this bill should pass he would favor the passage of another doing away with all burying grounds attached to poor asylums, for thereafter there will be no use for them. A man to-day may be surrounded with all the comforts of life, but to-morrow may bring about a reverse of fortune and he may become as poor as the poorest; and by voting for this bill how does any senator know but that indirectly he may be voting as public property the bodies of his own or his neighbors' children, who may, by the vicissitudes of life, find a death-bed in a poor asylum.
Mr. STREIGHT spoke in favor of the passage of the bill. He would not favor a measure that would turn over to physicians for dissection all the bodies of those who may die in charitable institutions, but this bill, by an amendment proposed by himself, saves such from the dissecting knife as may express such a wish.
Mr TREAT characterized the bill as anti-Christian, anti civilization, and odious in the sight of God and man. It is one of the most injudicious measures ever presented to a legislative body. No man familiar with the history of the world will call in question the fact that a respect for the human body as the temple of the soul, and a regard for the sacredness of human life, marks the development of science, of civilization and of religion. The respect manifested for the poor and the unfortunate is also a test of advancement in civilization. This bill proposes to make such a disposition of the bodies of the poor and the unfortunate as but very few of us or our friends are willing to make of theirs. We should not make such a disposition of the bodies of the poor that we would not make of our own or those of our friends.
Mr. WOOLLEN referred to the well known fact that prejudices are deep-seated, and in
many instances set the better of the judgment. Physicians engaged in the active duties
of their profession must have material with which to refresh their memories on the
subject of anatomy and add to their knowledge of surgery. The Senate has just passed a
stringent law against grave robbing, and now will it say we shall be estopped from
learning anatomy and physiology and still hold us responsible in person and property for
malpractice? That would be the grossest inconsistency. He had as deep sympathy as any
one for the poor and the unfortunate, but under this bill no man on account of poverty
will be put to any
Mr. W. appealed to the Senate, in behalf of his profession, to pass this bill. Anatomy is a science that depends upon the memory, the minute details of which will fail from the memory in the routine of business life, and we must dissect and redissect in order to understand how to replace a dislocation or reduce a fracture in the human body; and yet there is an unwillingness on the part of some senators to pass a law that will furnish the necessary subjects. Is it right and just?
Messrs. Riley. Sarnighausen and Reeve spoke in favor of the bill.
It was finally passed the Senate by--yeas 28: nays 18.
The bill [S. 12--Mr. Morris'] described early in yesterday's proceedings concerning the trial of civil causes in circuit and superior courts, was read the third time and passed the Senate by--yeas 38, nays 6.
The bill [S. 16-Mr. Dice's] but for one change of venue on preliminary examinations in cases of felony, was also finally passed by--yeas 44, nays 0.
The bill [S. 22--Mr. Foster's] legalizing certain acts of the trustee of the town or New Haven, was also finally passed in the Senate by--yeas 36, nays 6.
Then came the recess till 2 o'clock.
The bill [S. 23--Mr. Shaffer's] legalizing acts of the trustees of the town of Huntington, was read the third time, and finally passed the Senate by yeas--31, nays 8.
The court bill [S. 60-Mr. Wilson's] making an exchange of the counties of Switzerland and Scott in judicial districting.
Mr. HARRIS regarded the exchange as unwise, and as probably sought for on account of political reasons more than anything else.
Mr. WOOLLEN desired the passage of the bill principally because the contiguity of territory is far better if the proposed exchange is made.
The bill passed the Senate by yeas 30; nays 14.
Mr. WILSON, when his name was called, asked but failed to obtain an excuse from voting.
The bill [S. 80--Mr. Kramer's, fully described in these reports of Feb. 7] to abolish assessors and treasurers in towns and cities.
Messrs. HARRIS and SARNIGHAUSEN were not willing to have the bill passed without an effort to so amend it that cities may not be compelled to do away with these officers. They were willing to leave it discretionary.
Mr. FOSTER moved to recommit.
Mr. HEFRON favored the abolishment of the office of assessor, but was opposed to the election of marshals by the people, as they were necessarily thrown with the rowdy elements of society, and in nine cases out of ten fail to prosecute that class of individuals to whom they look for support at the polls. He favored the motion to recommit in the hope that that portion of the bill will be stricken out.
Mr. KRAMER opposed the motion to recommit. He was willing to except from the provisions of the bill the cities of Indianapolis and Fort Wayne, so it may be left optional with these cities whether they abolish these offices or not. There are always a number of candidates for marshal who will favor unqualified men for the office of trustee in order that they may get the place of Marshal. Now, which is worse--to have Trustees who are incompetent, elected to an important office where they control great financial and other interests or to have a town marshal elective, though he may occasionally jail to prosecute offenders against the law?
Mr. BURRELL moved to recommit the bill with instructions to so amend it as to exclude all towns and cities from the operations of the bill.
Mr. REEVE offered a substitute so as to make it optional with all cities and towns whether they come under the operation of the provisions of the bill.
Mr. DICE thought the question was settled the other day that the bill should pass with the amendment suggested by the Senator from Marion (Mr. Harris). He opposed any further amendment.
Mr. URMSTON would not favor any proposition to disturb the bill, where it refers to the office of marshal. There is no necessity for cities and towns to have an assessor, or to make separate assessments. If the word "may" be inserted before the word "marshal," who is to determine the question? He desired the bill in this case to be imperative.
Mr HARRIS proposed, as a substitute, to re-commit the bill to a committee of one, with instructions to amend the bill, so that cities "may" and towns "shall" abolish the office of assessor, and report at 4 o'clock.
Mr. BURRELL favored his own proposition in preference to this.
Mr. KRAMER desired immediate action, under the operations of the previous question, demanded by Mr. GARRIGUS. The substitute [Mr Harris'] was adopted by--yeas 28, nays 17. Thereupon the LIEUTENANT GOVERNOR appointed Mr. Harris as said committee.
Subsequently Mr. HARRIS returned the bill [S. 80] with a report in accordance with the instructions above set forth. The report was concurred in.
Mr. TAYLOR has some experience and knowledge of town business and knew that the better class of men would not accept the place of marshal as a rule, and consequently second rate men are generally put in that position. He preferred the proposition submitted by the senator from Jackson [Mr. Burrell].
Mr LEEPER had heard expressions from his constituents in opposit on to this bill, and consequently should vote against it.
The bill finally passed the Senate by--yeas 37, nays 9.
The bill [H. R. 140] to legalize certain proceedings of the trustees of the city of Terre Haute and the board of commissioners of Vigo county in the matter of annexation of land to Terre Haute was read the third time and finally passed by--yeas 40, nays 5--Messrs. MENZIES,VIEHE and DONHAM explaining its provisions.
The bill [S. 158--Mr. Harris'] to remove legal disabilities from married women, was read the third time and finally passed the Senate by-- yeas 42,nays 4.
The bin [S. 280--Mr. Comstock's] in relation to libraries the trustee of the township may levy a tax annually of not more than two cents on the $100 valuation--was read the third time and finally passed the Senate by--yeas 45, nays 1,
The bill [S. 303--Mr. Leeper's] authorizing the formation by farmers of associations for protection against fire or lightning, was read the third time and passed by--yeas 42, nays 3.
Mr. LEEPER explaining that the bill is to enable such companies as may desire to
insure
The following described bills for acts were introduced, read the first time and severally referred to appropriate committees:
By Mr. TRAYLOR, [S. 381] to provide for the publication of legal and official matters in newspapers.
By Mr. DAVIS, [S. 382] amending an amendatory of an act authorizing aid by counties and townships to railroads, so as to fix terms for freight rates, location of machine shops, depots, etc, and making it the duty of county commissioners to contract, and enforce the performance of the same. by
Mr. BURRELL, [S. 383] to regulate insurance companies--amount insured to be deemed the true value.
By Mr. MENZIES, [S. 384] creating a board for settlement of claims due the State [$350,000 from 52 counties] from counties for arms, munitions of war and ordnance stores--the governor to appoint three commissioners--the adjutant general to be one of the three.
By Mr. FOWLER [S. 385] to establish a board of State charities--the governor to appoint four to serve without compensation, two of which shall be women, one of whom at least once in each year shall visit and examine the management of a public charitable, penal or reformatory institutions.
By Mr. STREIGHT, [S. 386] to provide for the care and custody of orphan or abandoned children in any benevolent institution open for their reception.
Then the Senate adjourned.
The SPEAKER announced prayer by the representative from Washington county, Mr. Mitchell
On the motion of Mr. CAMPBELL the reading of yesterday's Journal was dispensed with.
were submitted and concurred in unless otherwise stated, as follows:
The
Also the bill [H. R. 446] creating a department of statistics, with a recommendation that it be indefinitely postponed.
The
Also the bill [H. R. 442] to amend the common school law, recommending its passage. It was ordered engrossed.
Also the bill [H. R. 320] to enable boards of school trustees of cities of 3,000 or more inhabitants to establish schools for special purposes, with a recommendation that the bill do pass.
Mr. THOMPSON opposed the bin from the beginning to the end, and for that reason he moved that the bill and report be indefinitely postponed.
Mr. REED said the purpose of the bill was to benefit that class of truants who were deceiving their parents. It was not a compulsatory bill, but cities may avail themselves of its benefits if they choose. He hoped it would not be indefinitely postponed.
Mr. MITCHELL had some experience in school teaching, and he knew that; many children were playing truant when their parents supposed they were in school. He was in favor of compelling the attendance of this class of boys in some way, and consequently he was in favor of the bill,
Mr. HUBBARD also had some experience in compulsory education. The State ought to assume a parental control of the boys of widows, or of parents who do not control their children. He believed this was a move in the right direction, and hoped the motion to indefinitely postpone would not prevail.
Mr. WATSON thought the bill ought to be printed, in order to allow representatives a chance to see the details of the bill.
Mr. THOMPSON thought the bill started out in a wrong premise. The miller of education ought not to be tampered with unless it is bettered. He never wished to vote for a bill that would allow an officer to arrest his child if he thought best not to send it to a common school, and the child should be found upon the street during the hours of school. There is a large portion of the people of this country who, on account of their religious views, do not send to the common schools, and this bill will cut deeply upon this class of our people.
Mr. Allen of Putnam, was opposed to the bill for the reason that he was opposed to making prisons out of our school houses. He was opposed to clothing school or other officers with the extraordinary power provided in this bill, but would make the school house as inviting as possible, that he child would seek it as a pleasure, instead of shunning its responsibilities as sought to be enforced by the provisions of this bill. We now have too much power developed in school officers. Some of them have come to feel that they have a right to control our children in and out of school. He was opposed to this bill for the reason, that it strikes at the liberties of the parent and child, in conflict with our principles of government. He would reduce rather then increase the power of school officers and should vote against the report and the passage of the bill.
Mr. GORDON was opposed to bringing the strong hand of the law upon children between the ages of 6 and 14 years. He though it was an outrage upon their tender feelings. His hatred of tyranny was growing stronger with the return of every year of his life. He thought the parent should be compelled to educate his child, but was opposed to punishing the tender little child. Our school system is oppressive enough. He stood against the passage of this bill.
Mr. OWEN was in favor of the bill because he wanted the sensibilities of the children cultivated, and the school room was the place to do it. He thought one year's experience under this law would bring parents to understand that their children must go to school. Compulsory education was the feature in this bill that he was in favor of.
Mr. MIERS, believed that discussion now would do no good, would only say he hoped the report of the committee would be concurred in and the bill printed.
Mr. MARCH claimed that we had advanced farther in the line of education than in any other. Order and obedience was the first law of a republic, and should be taught to our children. He was in favor of the principle in this bill.
The motion for indefinite postponement was rejected by yeas 34, nays 48.
On the motion of Mr. GORDON the report and bill was laid on the table and two hundred copies ordered printed.
Mr. GORDON offered a resolution, which was adopted, that the
Mr. DRAKE offered a concurrent resolution on the subject of the "black death," calling the attention of our representatives in Congress to the matter.
It was referred to the
On motion by Mr. CONNER the bills [H. R. 84 and 179] to encourage the growing of forest trees, and to prevent the sale of adulterated fertilizers, were ordered to be engrossed for the third reading.
The
Also, the bill [H. R. 412] to amend section 307 of the general practice act, with amendments, and when so amended, that the bill do pass. It was ordered engrossed.
Also, the bill [H. R. 424] to amend the act dividing the State into judicial circuits, with a recommendation that the bill pass. It was ordered engrossed.
Also, the bill [H. R. 511] fixing the time for holding courts in the Second judicial circuit, recommending its passage. It was ordered engrossed.
The committee on county and township business returned the bill [H. R. 390] to legalize the April election of 1878, recommending passage. It was ordered engrossed.
Also, the bill [H. R. 138] requiring township trustees to appropriate any surplus fund to the benefit of the roads, recommending passage. It was ordered engrossed.
Also the bill [H. R. 443] concerning township trustees, with a recommendation that the bill pass. It was ordered engrossed.
Also the bill [H. R. 206] authorizing county commissioners to pay certain expenses of constables and marshals, recommending passage. It was ordered engrossed.
The committee on claims returned the claim of Benton county for the prosecution and conviction of James L. McCollough, the murderer of Wm. C. Morgan in June, 1865, with a recommendation that the sum of $973.70 be allowed.
On the motion of Mr. OSBORNE of Elkhart, the report was indefinitely postponed.
The House took a recess until 2 o'clock p.m.
Mr. OSBORNE, of Elkhart, offered the following:
WHEREAS, The material reduction of the fees and compensation of county officers was made the paramount issue before the people in the last political campaign and all parties stand pledged to the people to bring about at this session of the General Assembly such material reduction, and thereby relieve the people of a portion of the burdens yet resting upon them, the results of the high prices of the preceding years. And whereas, more than half of the session has already expired, and as yet no general discussion has been had upon the subject, by which the members might be able to compare views and arrive at the same basis upon which to make such reduction which will be just toward the officers and beneficial to the people; therefore be it
Resolved, That in order to avoid the almost universal habit of charging construction fees, not in truth and spirit warranted by the statute, which has obtained among public officers of ate, and in order that the people may at all times know just what they are paying their servants for the transaction of their business, and may intelligently reduce or increase such pay so as to do justice at all, it is the duty of this General Assembly, and in accordance with the best interests of the people, that the pay and compensation of county auditors, treasurers, sheriffs, and clerks be established by permanent and fixed salaries, and graded among the several counties according to population, and that the general features of House bill No. 113 should be carried and engrafted into the law, making such changes, if necessary, as to amounts to be paid or received as will afford the officers a fair compensation for their services, and bring to the treasury a proper sum of the services rendered to the litigants and others having business done by the public officers.
Mr. LINDLEY offered an amendment, which was adopted, that the provisions of the
resolutions shall apply to the State officers, and that the
Mr. OVERMEYER offered an amendment, that in view of the facts recited in the preamble to said resolution, it is the duty of the General Assembly to provide at once for the submission of the constitutional amendments to the people.
Mr. BRIGGS moved to lay the amendment of Mr. Overmeyer on the table.
The yeas and nays were demanded, and being taken, resulted--yeas 47, nays 34.
So the amendment was laid on the table.
The resolution was then made the special order in committee of the whole for next Friday at 10 o'clock a.m.
Mr. DAILEY introduced a bill [H. R. 543] to amend section six of an act to repeal sections two and twenty-two inclusive of an act to provide for the registration of votes approved March 11, 1867 and May 13, 1869.
The
The report was concurred in and the bill ordered engrossed.
Mr. SAINT presented a petition on temperance signed by 1,700 citizens of Henry county for a local option law.
The
The bill [S. 277, fully described in these reports of February 6,] coming up in
order, was read the first time. The constitutional rule was suspended by yeas and nays
and the bill read the second time and referred to the
The following described bills were read the second time and referred to appropriate committees:
The bill [H. R. 540] to amend section 18 of an act for vacating and changing of highways.
The bill [H. R. 527] for the relief of sureties of Thos. F. Chambers.
The bill [H. R. 534] for a constitutional convention.
The bill [H. R. 532] to amend section 3 of an act of the common school law.
The bill [H. R. 526] to amend the act dividing the State for judicial purposes.
The bill [H. R. 525] to amend the fee and salary act.
The bill [H. R. 588] supplemental to the common school act.
The bill [H. R. 537] providing for the reorganization of circuits.
The bill [H. R. 539] for appointment of short hand reporters for courts.
The bill [H. R. 544] to set aside certain conveyances.
The bill [H. R. 530] to prevent the sale of liquors on fair grounds.
The bill [H. R. 536] to create a bureau of statistics.
The bill [H. R. 528] regulating the governor' salary.
The bill [H. R. 529] for the reappraisement of lands forfeited to the school fund.
The bill [H. R. 531] to encourage agricultural fairs.
The bill [H. R. 533] to amend the general practice act.
The bill [H. R. 535] to regulate the practice of medicine.
Mr. Compton's bill [H. R. 71] regulating the working of coal mines was read the third time.
Mr. OVERMEYER offered several amendments, which were agreed to by unanimous consent.
The bill was considered engrossed as amended, and the bill was then put upon its passage.
The yeas and nays thereon resulted--yeas 78, nays, 0. So the bill finally passed the House of Representatives.
Mr. Stevens' bill [H. R. 9] to regulate the setting of corner stones or monuments in public roads or highways, coming up in order, was read the third time and passed the House of Representatives by --yeas 81, nays 0.
Mr. OSBORNE of Elkhart, from the committee on the judiciary, returned the bill [S. 277] concerning interest on money, striking out all after the enacting clause and inserting new matter, and when so amended recommending its passage.
Mr. HEROD moved that the report and the bill lie upon the table, and that 200 copies be printed.
The yeas and nays were demanded, and, being taken, resulted --yeas 60, nays 22.
So the bill, on motion, was agreed to.
Mr. Dalton' bill [H. R. 17] to repeal an act to authorize aid to railroads by counties and townships, coming up in order, was read the third time and passed the House of Representatives by yeas 60, nays 17.
The House then adjourned until to-morrow morning at 10 o'clock.
Prayer by Rev. Dr. RYLAND T. BROWN, formerly State geologist, of the Third Church of Christ in this city.
On motion of Mr. KRAMER his local court bill [S. 268] was read the second time. The constitutional restriction was dispensed with by--yeas 40, nays 5; the bill was read the third time and finally passed the Senate by--yeas 46, nays 1.
Mr. BENZ, explaining his negative vote: Because the times of holding these courts were changed by a bill passed at the last session of the Legislature.
On motion of Mr. DICE the bill [S. 379--see these reports of Feb. 11 a. m.] to legalize certain acts of the board of trustees of Logansport was read the first time; the constitutional rule dispensed with by--yeas 44, nays 3; the bill was read the second time by title only; the third time by sections, and finally passed the Senate by--yeas 42, nays 6.
Pending the vote--
Mr. REEVE, when his name was called, entered his protest against this class of legislation. Aside from the tact that the bill has no merit; that it proposes to legalize that which never had a legal existence; mat it attempts to cure that which never was curable; he protested against the custom of officials of incorporated towns coming together and drinking whisky and smoking cigars, then taking the opinion of some fifty-cent attorney for about one half the time as to what the law is, and upon such opinion passing ordinances and levying assessments and taxes, and taking in farming lands, and after six or seven years of illegal proceedings, then come up to the capital and occupy the time of the General Assembly in attempting, by the passage of bills, to cure inexcusable enactments, caused by gross Ignorance of public officials, to legalize that which never had a legal existence and to supply brains for galoots too ignorant to do business. He denounced this thing as infamous, and hoped to live to see the time when public opinion will give it such kind of response that is due to it--and that is, to reject it. Sixty-three out of the 93 bills passed by the last Legislature were of this character, J3 were of general interest, and the rest were of local application to cure the defects caused by the infernal ignorance and negligence of the officials of the people.
Mr. FOSTER moved to suspend the order of business, that his resolution (printed in these Reports of February 11, p. m.,) in reference to investigating the charges made in the Daily Indianapolis Journal of the 7th inst. may be taken from the table. He desired to offer a substitute therefor. The motion was agreed to by yeas 32, nays 14.
Mr FOSTER offered his substitute, reciting that whereas an article in the Indianapolis Daily Journal of February 7 contains serious charges against the principal secretary of the Senate, and believing no harm can come from an honest and thorough investigation, therefore a committee of three be appointed, with power to send for persons and papers, and report the result of the investigation at the earliest possible moment.
A number of questions of order were raised; motions for indefinite postponement; for leave to withdraw the original resolution; an ineffectual demand was made by Mr. FOWLER for the previous question: a motion that the article from the newspaper be read was, by the casting vote of the lieutenant governor, laid on the table; and after considerable conversation and other debate.--
Mr. FOSTER asked and obtained leave to withdraw his resolution.
A large number of petitions, principally on the subject of temperance, were presented and referred to appropriate committees, whereupon--
Mr. TREAT took occasion to say that the Senate was treating a large number of the citizens of this great commonwealth very cavalierly in not reading their petitions. Thousands upon thousands are desiring legislation on the subject of liquor selling, looking in the direction of local option or the right of remonstrance, and he urged upon senators early I action on this subject.
Mr. LANGDON called up the motion of which he gave notice day before yesterday, to amend the Senate rules so they can not be suspended except by a two-thirds vote.
On motion of Mr. BURRELL it was indefinitely postponed by--yeas 26, nays 22.
Then came the recess till 2 o'clock.
Mr. LANGDON introduced a bill [S. 387] prohibiting the recording of deeds and
mortgages of lands or property on which taxes are due and unpaid, which was read the
first time and referred to the
Mr. BURRELL, from the committee thereon, returned the Congressional apportionment bill, [S. 35--Mr. Woollen's] with a majority' report thereon, recommending its passage, with a substitute more nearly conforming to the bill S. 326 [Mr. Major's].
Mr. VIEHE, from a majority of the committee thereon, returned the Legislative apportionment bill, [S. 54--Mr. Winterbotham's] with numerous amendments thereto, and when so amended recommending its passage.
Mr. BURRELL moved that both the Congressional and the Legislative apportionment bills be printed and made the special order for to-morrow afternoon at 2 o'clock.
Mr. HARRIS opposed the motion, as on his side of the House they had been relying on an implied arrangement, under which these bills were not to be considered till every Senator should be present.
Mr. LANGDON, speaking for himself and friends, said: We desire a bill under which all shades and all parties shall have a joint representation in the Legislature.
Mr. BURRELL, replying for the other side, said: We are asking for a fair bill--our bill does not propose any fence rail districts,
Mr. STREIGHT moved to amend by making: these bills the special order or Tuesday next, at 10 o'clock a. m.
After considerable conversational debate--
The amendment was agreed to, and on motion by Mr. VIEHE, 200 copies of the majority and minority reports on both bills, were ordered printed.
Mr. HART offered a resolution directing the
Mr. STREIGHT offered a resolution instructing the
Mr COFFEY favored the resolution. The interests of the people, especially the farmers of this State, demand a reappraisement at as early a period as possible. This Legislature can pass no law that will relieve them more. Since the last appraisement real estate has declined 40 to 50 per cent.
Mr. HEFRON failed to see what benefits the taxpayer would realize from an appraisement this year, when the cost of taking it--probably $100,000 is taken into consideration. The public expenditures remain the same. No difference about the appraisement, the money must come. Under the present law a reappraisement will have to be made next year anyhow, and why take one this year?
Mr. WINTERBOTHAM also thought the expenditure necessary to take a reappraisement this year is uncalled for. There is no general demand for a reappraisement now. He hoped, the resolution would not pass--he regarded it as uncalled for, unnecessary and unwise.
Mr. KRAMER: The resolution would only cause an unnecessary expense as has been said, and he opposed it. There would be noshing gained by an appraisement now. Real estate has not depreciated much more in one section of the State than another, although the complaint is general that the assessment is too high.
Mr. STREIGHT asked and obtained consent to amend his resolution, by adding thereto the words "and every four years thereafter," which amendment would do away with the objection as to the extra expense. Marion county now pays one eighth of the entire tax of the State. We should have had an appraisement two or three years ago--it is now unfair and unjust.
Mr. WIER was satisfied the appraisement is now higher than it ought to be in many places, but in his part of the State it is more equal. If it would not increase the expenses of the State he would favor the resolution, out of consideration to those sections suffering under a too high appraisement.
Mr. KRAMER did not think the benefit to a few localities would overbalance the expense--nothing would be gained by it to the State at large. Under the present law we are getting along well enough. We are not now in such a financial condition as to authorize us to make an outlay for another and an extra appraisement this year without obtaining A corresponding benefit.
Mr. COFFEY believed a majority of the people demand a reappraisement of real estate in order that the burdens of government may be equalized throughout the State.
The resolution was adopted by--yeas 32, nays 12.
On motion by Mr. SHAFFER the proposed amendment to the rules, limiting speeches to ten minutes, notice of which was given the other day, was taken up and after dilatory proceedings was agreed to by--yeas 33, nays 11.
And then the Senate adjourned.
The session was opened with prayer by Mr. HUBBARD, the representative from Henry county.
The reading of the journal was dispensed with.
Mr. OVERMEYER entered a motion to reconsider the vote yesterday, setting the time--Friday at 10 o'clock, in committee of the whole--for the consideration of Mr. Osborne's resolution in relation to fees and salaries.
Mr. WILLARD said he noticed, in his absence on duty with the prison committee, that a resolution had been submitted to the House, concerning fees and salaries, and that a time was fixed for the discussion of the resolution. It was well known the committee on fees and salaries had employed an expert, to collate all matters pertaining to the subject, and that the committee would be ready to report a bill thereon, and he thought the consideration of the resolution was premature.
Mr. OSBORNE of Elkhart, said when he introduced the resolution yesterday he had not the
remotest idea of doing any one or any
Mr. OVERMEYER did not make the motion to reconsider for the purpose of defeating the resolution, but that all these matters should be first considered by the committee on fees and salaries.
Mr. SAINT did not believe that there was any other intention in the resolution, or by the author, than that the subject matter should be fully discussed before the House.
Mr. HUBBARD: There was no subject except that of temperance that agitates the mind of the people of the State more than that of fees, and salaries, and the discussion should be free and without party bias or prejudice.
Mr. MIER8 hoped the motion to reconsider might not prevail, and that the House may have an opportunity to discuss the subject.
Mr. JOHNSON had voted for the consideration of the resolution so as to bring the matter
before the House. He thought it full time that the House had taken some action upon the
subjects of fees and salaries, and he was in favor of a full and fair discussion. He was
of the opinion that the discussion before the House would aid the
On motion by Mr. ALLEN of Putnam, the motion to reconsider was laid on the table by yeas 61, nays 31.
The
The
Mr. SLEETH moved to amend so as to give the County Commissioners discretionary powers.
Mr. FANCHER said the bill amended the law so as to allow stock to run at large in one section of the township when made consistent by the division by river or railroad. The amendment was rejected, and the bill was ordered engrossed.
Also, the bill [H. R. 183] concerning licenses in certain cases. It was indefinitely postponed by yeas 58, nays 34.
Also, the bill [H. R. 447] concerning farmers' insurance companies, with a recommendation that it pass.
On the motion of Mr. TULLEY the report was laid on the table.
The
Also the bill [H. R. 493] to prevent certain animals from running at large, recommending the passage of the bill. It was ordered engrossed.
Also the bill [H. R. 475] to authorize county commissioners to purchase ground for county fairs, recommending that the same do lie on the table. The report was concurred in.
Also the bill [H. R. 406] for the protection of sheep--being a substitute for the original bill--recommending that the original bill lay on the table, and the adoption of the substitute.
On the motion of Mr. JOHNSON the constitutional restriction was suspended by yeas 77, nays 11, and the substitute bill [H. R. 644] was read the second time.
Mr. MIERS offered an amendment to appropriately add these words: "Or any person having the dog under his control by the consent of his owner."
The amendment was adopted, and the bill was ordered to be engrossed for the third reading.
The House then took a recess until 2 o'clock p. m.
The
The
On the motion of Mr. COPELAND the bill was laid on the table.
Also, the bill [H. R. 444] defining warehouses and receipts, recommending the passage of the bill. It was ordered engrossed.
Also, the bill [H. R. 114] to legalize the organization of building, etc., associations, with amendments, and when so amended that the bill do pass. It was ordered engrossed.
Also, the bill [H. R. 253] for the execution and acknowledgement of official bonds, with, a recommendation that the bill pass. It was ordered engrossed
The committee on cities and towns returned the bill [H. R. 231] to legalize the corporation of the town of Auburn, DeKalb county, with a recommendation that it do pass. It was ordered engrossed.
Also, the bill [H. R. 303] to legalize the acts of Tell City, in Perry county, recommending passage. It was ordered engrossed.
Mr. OWEN moved that the report of the
Mr. SLEETH thought the provision in the bill that makes the owner of the building in which the liquor is sold liable for damages, is wrong and ought to be amended in that particular.
Mr. OWEN thought if a man rents his property for the sale of intoxication liquor he ought to be held responsible for damages sustained by the sale thereof. He considered temperance one of the most sacred interests of the State, and he was therefore in favor of the bill.
Mr. SAINT thought the bill was all right. There were but few men who were retailing liquor, that were responsible, and from whom you could collect damages, and thought the owners of the property ought to be responsible. He would vote for the bill.
Mr. VANPELT did not believe that the man who rents his property ought to be responsible, and therefore as a member of the committee he voted for the indefinite postponement of the bill, and he did not now propose to go back on his action.
Mr. TULLEY was opposed to the bill because it would take away property from one man to pay for the damages committed by another when the former was ignorant of the fact that whisky was sold in his building.
Mr. MIEKiS was as much for temperance reform as any one. If it is wrong to sell liquor it is wrong to license the sale of it. He was opposed to the bill because he believed it was unconstitutional; and if wrong it ought not to I be passed at all.
Mr. SLEETH thought the person owning the property ought to be made jointly liable for damages, but would not go as far as this bill and make him wholly liable. If the party renting has knowledge of the retailing of liquors on his premises Mr. S. would say "amen."
On the motion of Mr. SLEETH the bill was recommitted to the
On the motion of Mr. OSBORNE, of Elkhart, the business on the speaker's table was taken up.
The resolution of the House returned from the Senate, for pay for Janitor McDaniels, with amendment that the statutes for senators be paid for, coming up--
Mr. LEHMAN moved that the House concur in the amendment of the Senate.
After considerable discussion, and the fact developed that a motion had been entered upon the journal of this House for a reconsideration of the vote refusing to concur in the matter of paying for the statutes for senators.--
Pending which--
Mr. SHANKS said: Mr. Speaker--I am mortified that the House did indefinitely postpone the Senate concurrent resolution relative to the payment for the statutes purchased by the Senate. This House has decided that its members do not need the statutes when making new laws or changing old ones. The Senate thought that it is not so well informed as the House thought it was. That the House is mistaken, I fear it will find out when too late. Sir, there is a respect due to the Senate from this co ordinal e branch of the law-making power that is not found in our indefinite postponement of its acts without consideration. If the governor, who is a co-ordinate branch of the law-making power of the Senate, were to send this House his message, we would not, I hope--indeed, I do sincerely hope--would not return it to him or indefinitely postpone it without consideration. Certainly the Senate is entitled to as much consideration. The present, enlightened civilization and proper management of legislative business forbids such disrespect by one house of the law-making power toward another.
Mr. LEHMAN moved that the House now reconsider that action.
The yeas and nays were demanded, and, being taken, resulted--yeas 46, nays 46.
Mr. SLEETH made the point of order that by reconsidering that vote, it would authorize the pay for 50 copies of the statutes.
So the motion failed.
On the motion of Mr. TULLEY,the House refused to concur in the amendment, and a
The speaker appointed as such committee, on the part of the House, Messrs. Tulley and March.
On the motion of Mr. CALDWELL the bill [H. R. 340] for the apportionment or the State for senatorial and representative purposes, was taken up and read the third time.
Mr. LEHMAN demanded the previous question and under its operations the bill passed the House of Representatives--yeas 56, nays 38, as follows:
Yeas--Messrs. Alden, Baker, Blockley, Briggs, Brown of Jasper, Bryant, Caldwell, Carter, Compton, Confer, Cunningham, Dailey, Dalton, Davidson, Davis, Drake, Driver, Edwins, English, Faulkner, Flodder, Galbraith, Garroutte,Ginz, Handy, Hart, Hosmer, Humphreys, Huthsteiner, Johnson, Kester, Lehman, Miers, Mitchell, Nave, Osborn of Elkhart, Perry, Reicheldafer, Rooker, Saint, Scholl, Schweitzer, Shauck, Shields, Shutt, Stucker, Taylor of Daviess, Taylor of Warrick, Thompson, Tulley, Vanpelt, Van Valzah, Willard, Wimmer, Works, Speaker Cauthorn, H. S.--56.
Nays--Messrs. Arnold of Blackford, Arnold of Wabash, Bearss, Brown of Steuben, Campbell, Carey, Connaway, Conner, Copeland. Donnell, Golden, Harland, Herod, Hess, Hopkins, Hubbard, Kelly, Kirkpatrick, Lindley, Major, March, Messick, Osborn of Vermillion, Owen, Reed, Robeson, Rodman, Robinson, Shanks, Skinner, Sleeth, Snoddy, Stevens, Taylor of Lagrange, Thayer, Thornburg, Vawter, Watson--38.
Peoding the roll call--
Mr. HESS, in explanation of his vote, when his name was called said: This bill disfranchises over 3,100 voters of Koscinsko and Wabash counties simply because these counties give large Republican majorities. The amendment he offered the other day would have given a just representation to the counties of Huntington and Wabash, Kosciusko and Whitley, Allen and Wells, but the party in power saw fit to vote down the amendment. Believing, therefore, that this bill is unfair and unjust, he voted "no."
Mr. KIRKPATRICK, when his name was called, in explanation of his vote said: He deemed it a right to protest, and as he considered some of the provisions of this bill infamous, he therefore was compelled to vote "no."
Mr. REED, in explanation of his vote when his name was called, said: He voted against the bill because it placed our distinguished fellow citizen, Thos. A. Hendricks, in a position of antagonism to his party. In a public speech at a ratification meeting, held in this city after the October elections, he said that no apportionment which was not perfectly fair would receive his approval. This bill is not fair or just in its apportionment of senators and representatives. He therefore voted "no"
Mr. SLEETH was once guilty of voting for a gerrymandering bill, but should never be guilty of the like again. There were portions of this State that this bill would do great injustice to, and for that reason he was compelled to vote "no."
Mr. STEVENS, in explaining his vote, said: On account of injustice done the Northern part of the State by this bill he would vote "no."
Mr. TAYLOR of Lagrange when his name was called, in explanation of his vote, said he was obliged to protest against the bill as being unjust to Lagrange and Steuben counties, as it disfranchises 2,500 legal voters, and that Lake and Porter counties, with a less number of voters, has a senator and two representatives. Therefore he voted "no."
Mr. WORKS, in explanation of his vote said: When this bill was before the House before, he objected to it on one ground, and one only. He believed then that injustice was done to the voters of two of the counties in the, Northern part of the State, He held the gentleman from Elkhart(Mr. Osborne) responsible for what he then said. If he had no other light now than that given him by the explanation given by Mr. Osborne then, he would undoubtedly vote against the bill; but lie had found, upon investigation, that the surplus population that he had then believed to be disfranchised by the bill has been properly distributed among the adjoining counties South of the ones referred to, he therefore voted "aye."
So the bill passed the House of Representatives.
The following described bills were read the first time and passed to the second reading:
The bill [S. 9] to promote the science of medicine, which was read the first time.
The bill[S. 6] legalizing acknowledgments of deeds, etc., by ex-notaries.
The bill [S. 12] concerning the trial of civil causes in circuit and superior courts.
The bill [S. 16] in reference to change of venue [but one change shall be granted] in preliminary examination in cases of felony.
The bill [S. 22] to legalize the acts of the town of New Haven in Allen county, etc.
The bill [S. 23] to legalize the acts of the town of Huntington.
The bill [S. 60] to make an exchange of Switzerland county and Scott county in their judicial circuit.
The bill [S. 80] abolishing assessors and treasurers in towns and cities.
The bill [S. 136] in relation to the dissection of human bodies.
The bill [S. 158] removing legal disabilities of married women.
The bill [S. 280] an act supplemental to public libraries.
The bill [S. 303] to enable farmers and others to form voluntary associations.
The bill [H. R. 543] to repeal sections 2 to 22 inclusive of an act to provide for
the registration of voters was read the second time and referred to the
The bill [H. R. 35] providing for the election of justices of the peace, coming up in regular order, was read the third time.
Mr. WORKS was opposed to the passage of the bill because it did not allow appeals on smaller claims than $20. The party with a small claim should have the right of appeal as well as the larger ones. It ought not to pass because it is wrong in principle.
Mr. WATSON claimed that when these small cases got into the higher courts the claim was lost sight of, and the question was who should pay the costs. He thought the ill favored tho poor man. Therefore he was in favor of the bill.
Mr. OSBORNE, of Elkhart, did not think it would be safe to pass the bill, and thought it would work an injury.
Mr. MIERS was opposed to the increase of the one man power the justice of the peace would have if this bill should pass, and for this reason he opposed it.
Mr. VANPELT thought that this was one of the needed reforms, and hoped the bill would pass.
Mr. MARCH said that in nine cases out of 10 the poor man gets his rights before the justice of the peace. He believed in the admonition of scripture to agree with thine adversary quickly while thou art in the way with him. He believed the bill ought to pass.
The bill then passed the House of Representatives by yeas 58, nays 30.
The House then adjourned until 10 o'clock to-morrow.
Prayers were uttered by Rev. Dr. Henry Day, of the Baptist church, of this city.
Mr. KRAMER asked and obtained leave to introduce a bill [S. 388] amendatory of the fee
and salary act of March 12, 1875, so as to reduce the salaries of all State and county
officials, except the governor and auditor and treasurer of State, which on his motion
was referred to the
On motion by Mr. BURRELL, the bill[H. R. 340] which passed the House of Representatives yesterday] to fix the number of senators and representatives for the General Assembly of Indiana was taken up, read the first time, 200 copies ordered printed, and made the special order for Tuesday next at 10 o'clock, a. m , at the same hour with the Senate bills on legislative and congressional apportionment.
Mr. LANGDON offered a resolution that the auditor of State communicate to the Senate the names of foreign insurance companies which have complied with the assessment laws; also what, if any, measures have been taken against such corporations as have failed to comply herewith, their names, etc. He understood bat one of the corporations coming under the provisions of the act referred to has complied with its terms, and that but once, since the enactment of the law in 1873.
The resolution was adopted.
The
The LIEUTENANT GOVERNOR announced the special order for this hour, being the bill, [S.31--Mr. Grubbs--see these reports of February 11, p. m.] The question being on Mr. Reeve's amendment to Mr. Woollen's motion to refer the bill to a committee of three lawyers, with instructions.
Mr. REEVE referred to the present law a one under which a just administration of a live man's estate could be had; when once in the hands of the court the man is powerless to do harm. The smartest committee in this Legislature can not find anything in it that would admit of fraud under this bill, everything is placed subservient to the oath and schedule of the assignor. He has the inside track, he has the time-keeper and the bell-ringer on his side, and the creditor has to come in and prove everything. This bill amounts to an absolute and unqualified discharge from every debt the assignor owes. There is a cat in this meal tab--not that the author intended it; but that is the case. The bill is in effect an absolute and complete insolvent law, and in no sense a law made for the benefit of creditors. It is nothing like so just as the red law, the common law under bankruptcy proceedings in England, nor does it protect the creditor. The law as it now stands is an absolute trust in control of the court, within the reach of every party interested for relief. He desired the proposed reference, and when the committee reports defects in the present law he had no fears but that every senator will agree that the present law covers every conceivable right and contingency, admits of equal and exact distribution with absolute protection to the assignor and the creditors, no one of which features this bill accomplishes.
Mr. COMSTOCK: The bill has been carefully prepared. He hoped the motion to refer would not prevail. While not pretended that the bill is perfect, it should be carefully considered and receive the treatment it deserves.
Mr. GRUBBS: If this bill is no improvement on the old law. Senators can discover that at it may be considered. All the best provisions of the old law are incorporated in the bill, and it is an improvement on the old law as every practicing lawyer will say it is. Then it ought to pass.
The amendment was rejected, and the motion to refer was also rejected.
Mr. GRUBBS moved to so amend section. two as to prevent the transfer of property by the assignor to his sureties or indorsers.
Mr. REEVE insisted this section should be amended so as to avoid collusion; if not, it will do more to overturn the commercial and trade relations of the State than anything else outside the old bankrupt law.
Mr. GRUBBS: Under the law as it now stands the assignor has a right to make preferences. That ought not to be possible under our law, and it is the object of this section to strike down such transactions. Before he makes his assignment his preferences will stand, and they can not he affected by proceedings in court.
Mr. BURRELL: A man ought to be rewarded for diligence. He who looks after his own business best is best calculated to take care of himself, and this section is contrary to that principle and consequently ought not to stand as it now is.
Mr. WOOD thought the section ought to pass. The old law is a nuisance, and we ought to have a good assignment law If this bill will answer the purpose the old law was intended to it ought to pass. If the creditor and debtor are both protected, what more do you want in an assignment law?
Mr. TRAYLOR objected to this section. If a man in failing circumstances desires to rob his neighbors, under this section it can be done to perfection. He could borrow money 50 days before making an assignment, give a mortgage on his real estate to secure the repayment of it, and by this section the loaner would be placed on the same terms with those debts not secured; and for that reason Mr. T. was opposed to this section.
Mr. MENZIES: The first line in the Reckon will be an element of great uncertainty and trouble. Possession is presumptive evidence of ownership of personal property. The bill is simply a voluntary bankrupt law; and all the personal property the assignor disposes of sixty days previous is swept into it. It would strike down at one blow all transactions of personal property. If the Senate passes a voluntary bankrupt law let it be stripped of uncertainty.
Mr. LANGDON: Under the present law the assigner may make preferences up to the time of his application. This second section, does not interfere with any race for diligence, as intimated by the senator from Jackson [Mr. Burrell]. The section only invalidates where a guilty knowledge is had-- where a party taking benefit under the law is par icipis criminis in a transaction for the purposes of fraud.
Mr. REEVE offered a substitute for the amendment the following: insert the words "or to any person liable to such debtor as surety or indorser, such creditor serving notice that the assignor was not the owner of sufficient property or means to pay his debts at the time, and intending to obtain a preference in his own favor and prevent an equal distribution of the property under any assignment," in lieu of the words "having notice of the insolvency."
Mr. MENZIES--Ninety-nine out of a hundred transactions are those affecting personal property, and to propose to put this element of uncertainty with all such dealings would be an outrage.
Mr. GARRIGUS: Under the provisions of this section every man would be afraid to deal in personal property; while now we have a reasonable law to set aside fraudulent transactions. This bill would make a smelling committee of everybody who buys personal property. He opposed the section.
Mr. HEFRON could see no objection to the transfer of personalty as set forth in this section. He could see no risk as the section does not contemplate that the personal property shall be effected only so far as the creditor of the insolvent is concerned. Other than creditors of the insolvent would not be effected.
The substitute was agreed to.
Then came the recess till 2 o'clock.
Mr. BURRELL made an ineffectual motion--yeas 12, nays 22--to indefinitely postpone the bill.
Mr. KRAMER thought legislation should favor those who can not help themselves, and he moved to amend by adding a proviso that this section shall not apply to sureties where the same relate to bonds of administrators or guardians.
Mr. HEFRON failed to see the propriety or necessity for this amendment.
Mr. MENZIES though this proviso would go further than any bankrupt act ever yet has. This bill makes a proviso that, whenever a man wants to, he may commence a systematic swindle of his creditors.
The amendment was rejected.
Mr. HEFRON moved to amend by striking from the third line the words "of insolvency or." It was agreed to.
Mr. REEVE--This bill will throw the burden of proof upon the purchaser, and it would unquestionably injure more innocent persons than it would benefit deserving ones. He made an ineffectual motion to strike out the words "and sale of personal property" where they occur in the first line.
Section 2 as amended was agreed to by--yeas 22, nays 19.
Mr. GRUBBS explained that section 3 was the same as the present law, with an additional provision that a list of liabilities with the postoffice address of creditors shall be furnished.
Mr. REEVE moved to amend section 3 by requiring deeds to be recorded "immediately" instead of "ten days." Anything in the shape of colluding that law should be prevented. The assignor has no business to make a deed till it is ready to be delivered.
The amendment was agreed to by--yeas 18, nays 17.
Mr. GRUBBS explained section 6 was similar to the red law.
Mr. REEVE offered an amendment to section 8, so that the appraisement shall be based on a sale on a credit of 18 months.
It was rejected by yeas 16, nays 20.
Mr. TAYLOR, by consent, amended section 10 by the insertion of a clause empowering the assignee to make partition of lands. Under the present statute there is doubt about that power.
Mr. COFFEY offered an amendment to section 15, so as to reach the inchoate right of wives of parties availing themselves of the benefit of this act.
It was agreed to.
On motion of Mr. REEVE, an amendment was made to section 17, requiring all bills of the trustee to be allowed by the court.
MR. COFFEY moved to amend section 21 by striking therefrom the requirement of the written consent of two-thirds of creditors before the assignor shall be discharged.
Mr. REEVE moved to strike out sections 22, 23, 24, 25--making provisions for the discharge of the assignee.
Mr. GRUBBS--This raises one of the most important questions in the bill--whether the
assignee shall be granted a discharge. A man after complying with the provisions of
the bill should no longer be weighted down with indebtedness. We should offer that
premium to an honest man who gives up all his property to pay all his debts. Justice
and equity
Mr. REEVE: Any one entitled to the name of a business man desires to live within his income, and does not look around for a loyal subterfuge under which to find a soft bed to lie down on. An honest man can always make a fair coin promise with his creditors. The law aims at justice; otherwise it ceases to be law. No such law as this should go upon the statute books, for it provisions will be pronounced unconstitutional, because it impairs the obligation of contracts.
Mr. HART did not believe the people desired a voluntary bankrupt law passed. He moved to indefinitely postpone the whole subject matter.
Mr. HEFRON still believed the provision for discharge of the honest debtor was a just and humane provision; it was a matter of public policy to relieve the burden of debt from the shoulders of an honest, energetic man. Security debts often bears a man down beyond any hope of relief, without granting a discharge by some such law was proposed in this bill, otherwise what encouragement have such to acquire property? He believed in an honest and just bankrupt law. We have recently got rid of an odious law--odious in its practice--but under the State law there should be some remedy for the unfortunate men of brains, enterprise and ability. Is there anything more just and honest than, when one complies with the provisions of this bill, a discharge shall be granted? Only those who file their claims and participate in dividends are barred.
Mr. FOSTER moved that further debate cease on this question, which motion was agreed to.
The motion to indefinitely postpone the bill was rejected.
The amendment [Mr. Reeve's] was also rejected by--yeas 14, nays 25.
The amendment [Mr. Coffey's] was also rejected.
The section, as amended, was adopted.
Mr. Reeve moved a substitute for section 28, declaring all laws in force relating to voluntary assignments repealed where in conflict with this act, in other respects this act is to be held as cumulative; and will affect no procedings pending.
It was adopted.
Other minor amendments were agreed to. The sections were severally adopted--frequently without being read; and the bill was ordered engrossed for the third reading.
On motion by Mr. HARRIS his bill [S. 131] authorizing a police judge in clues having a voting population of 16,O00 at the last gubernatorial election, was taken up, considered engrossed, read the third time and finally passed the Senate by--yeas 37,nays 60.
Mr. BURRELL offered a resolution authorizing the appointment of an additional door-keeper. The yeas and nays being taken thereon resulted--yeas 14 nays 19; when no quorum voting--
The Senate adjourned.
Mr. MAJOR, representative from Morgan county, opened the session with prayer, and the reading of the journal of yesterday's proceedings was dispensed with.
Mr. SHANKS, from the
The House resolved itself into a
Mr. EDWINS said during the campaign last year the Democracy and a good portion of the Republican party promised the people they would use mi their influence for the seduction of fees and salaries of county and State officers. The county officers are getting more from their offices than they can get in any other business in life. Constructive fees was the greatest evil, and, therefore, he was opposed to constructive fees and in favor of the resolution.
Mr. WILLARD had given a great deal offline to the consideration of this subject,
besides having an expert employed to assist him. There was a demand to reduce the fees
of officers, but we should not yield so far as to make their salaries too meager. It
should be made so as to stand the constitutional test. He read from several authorities
to sustain his position, that under the present State constitution the Legislature can
not pass a law that will fix a salary for the clerk or sheriff. The sheriff and clerk
should be paid by fees. How can we regulate the fees by population? The only way would
be upon the census of 1870. He wanted a full and fair discussion of this question. The
Mr. STUCKER said it was the duty of this Legislature to pass a fee and salary bill, and that soon. He was not particular what kind of a law was passed so that it showed to the people that something was tried to be done in the right direction. The fees were now double what they ought, to be, and must be cut down. Nearly all the fraud in elections we have to contend with is on amount of high salaries. He wanted the fees reduced so low that men could not, afford to buy their offices.
Mr. OSBORNE of Elkhart said he supposed it devolved upon him to show that a
constitutional law could be passed to salary these officers. A reduction of fees and
salaries had been attempted by previous Legislatures, and yet the fees are in some cases
larger now than before. He believed it about impossible to make a fee bill that would
not be construed as containing constructive fees. He insisted that the supreme court
decisions sustained the idea that the county officers may be all salaried officers. The
only point urged against the unconstitutionality of the law of 1871 was the surplus
derived from litigants should go into the county fund, to be used for general purposes.
It was not intended that the clerk and sheriff could not be salaried officers. The same
distinction is held in the decision of 1874. If the money was used solely for judicial
purposes it would have been constitutional, but because it was used for general purposes
it was illegal. The proposition now is to make a straight, square salaried officer of
both the sheriff and clerk, and in his judgment it was constitutional. He thought the
basis for grading the salaries can be made from either the census taken by the United
States or our own State. If the salaries are made too high or too low the next
Legislature can correct them. Clerks and sheriffs now get more than their services are
worth. It is giving a premium, to the man who can manipulate a convention,and obtain an
election by skullduggery or otherwise. So long as our public officers get more than
their services are worth, so long will we have cor-[ruption]
Mr. BRIGGS cited the operation of the law in his county. What benefit would it be to the people to put these officers upon a salary and leave the fee bill unchanged? The bill of 1875 does not authorize construction fees. He would like to see the fees and salaries so regulated as to do justice to all. He would not vote to reduce the fees and salaries so as to make them so low that men of ability will not take these offices, but was in favor of the passage of a bill he held in his hand, which would be introduced by the gentleman from Lawrence [Mr. Dalton], reducing the fees of county auditors and treasurers so as to save to the State at least $50,000 per annum, and reducing the fees and salaries of other county officers at least 20 per cent below the fee and salary bill of 1875, which would be a great saving to the people of the State.
Mr. Speaker CAUTHORNE thought too much time was being spent in the discussion of this resolution. The only proposition we could accept now was the one proposed by the gentleman from Elkhart [Mr. Osborne]. The trouble is not with the law, but it is in the way the county officers construe the law. They ought to be paid liberally, but the pay ought to be fixed by law so that all could know what the officers are getting. There is no fee bill that will control a dishonest man muter the best bill that could be devised, unjust and unlawful fees would be taxed by dishonest officials, and by a reduction in the fees honest officials would be impoverished. He believed that the only way in which competent legislation on this subject could be had was by a change of the constitution, and with that belief be had voted to submit the amendments to the people for their action on the 4th of March. We can have no substantial relief now unless we come to the proposition of the gentleman from Elkhart [Mr. Osborne].
On motion the committee rose, reported progress, and asked to sit again at 2 o'clock. The report was concurred in.
The House took a recess until 2 o'clock.
The following described bills were introduced, read the first time, and severally passed to the second reading:
By Mr. SHANKS, [H. R. 545] to provide for the purchase by the State of a certain tract of land, to protect the State against loss--36 acres north of the city of Indianapolis, known as the State fair grounds.
By Mr. GOLDEN, [H. R. 546] to amend an met for the Incorporation of towns and cities.
By Mr. GOLDEN [H. R. 547] to amend secs. 1 and 3 of an act to authorize cities or towns to negotiate bonds for school purposes.
By Mr. G0LDEN [H. R. 548] to amend sec. one of an act to authorize trustee of incorporated towns and cities to levy a tax for school purpose.
By Mr. BRIGGS [H. R. 549] to amend section 5 of an act to provide for the more speedy trial of causes.
On motion the House again resolved itself into the
Mr. WORKS regarded the question of great importance. The question is how this matter may be brought about for the best. He considered the bill [H. R. 113] as clearly unconstitutional. He was decidedly in favor of an absolute salary, and if constitutional such a measure ought to become a law.
Mr. TAYLOR, of Daviess, had no doubt that the Legislature could pass a well-worded law that would be constitutional for the salary of county officers. He was in favor of a salary, but was opposed to some provisions of the bill referred to in the resolution, especially to that part which would compel a man to pay his fee to the clerk in advance. Require a cross bond if you will, or have a schedule of fees properly guarded, by which these clerks can collect their costs; then salary your officers, you would have it about right. Constructive fees he regarded as stealing.
Mr. SLEETH believed that the House was a unit as to the duty of passing a law for the reduction of fees and salaries, but did not want a law which might be decided unconstitutional; his county officers were honest, and he was willing to help others make their officers honest. He did not want to repeat the blunder of the Legislature of 1871. It was to provide for a law upon this subject: that these constitutional amendments were started in the General Assembly two years ago. We have a right to require every litigant to pay the expenses of his suit. We can fix what the clerk shall charge. We may require a docket fee, which is to help pay for the books, etc., to record the matters pertaining to his own suits. We cannot plead ignorance, for we have the light of the highest judicial authority on the subject, and we ought to legislate in the light of the supreme court decisions.
Mr. SAINT was not prepared for the argument. If there was one subject more than another that entered into the campaign last fall it was the extravagant fees paid to county officers. The people saw in a few years that county officers who went into the office in ordinary circumstances would, in a few years, be building large mansions driving fast and expensive horses. He believed to-day you could make a law that would regulate these affairs and stand the constitutional test. It is time that something was done in that direction, and it is within our power to do it. He voted to submit the constitutional amendments to the people at an early day. He believed that 90 out of the 100 who came here were pledged to a reduction of the fees of the county officers.
Mr. Thompson spoke at length in favor of a bill fixing the salaries of county officers.
Mr. SHANKS: In view of the fact that this is a matter of economy he had thought that politics would not get into the matter. He was in favor of a bill that would reduce the salary of county and State officers to a level with the times. He wanted a paid salary so that every man in the State might understand it.
Mr. GORDON was in favor of the general principle of the bill, and if he could get it amended in a few minor points would vote for it. He could not find the clause in the constitution that would conflict with the general principles of this bill. He had no party to serve in the matter.
Mr. JOHNSON believed this Legislature could pass a constitutional fee or salary bill
either. The bill could be passed without an emergency clause, and by the time the
constitutional amendments were adopted the law would go into operation. His judgment
was if
Mr. MITCHELL was sorry that party spirit had been manifested in this discussion. He was opposed to constructive fees, but was in favor of a plain salary for all county officers.
Mr. SCHWEITZER thought when the House resolved itself into the
Mr. WILLARD: The purpose of the resolution was to take the sense of this House as to a law for fees or salary. The committee on fees and salaries will report such a bill as the House shall direct.
Mr. ALLEN of Putnam offered an amendment that the
The resolution [Mr. Osborne's] was then adopted--affirmative 53, negative not counted.
On the motion of Mr. Falkner, the committee rose, reported the adoption of the resolution, and recommended its passage by the House.
The report was concurred in.
The
The House then adjourned.
Prayers by Rev. Dr. O. A. BURGESS, president of Butler University. The reading of the minutes of yesterday's proceedings were dispensed with.
On motion by Mr. DAVIS, his railroad bill [S. 382] was lead the second time. He explained that where counties or townships agree to tax themselves to aid railroads, under an agreement, with the railroad company for the building of depots, or machine shops, etc., this bill would give the local authorities power to compel the railroad companies to fulfill the agreement. These companies frequently promise to do certain things and often never comply with such promises, and this measure will compel them to comply with the terms of their contract.
Mr. LANGDON objected to the bill.
Mr. REEVE: Under the present law stock-holders are individually liable for labor performed and material used, and unless counties and, townships, which may become stock-holders, are exempt from that provision, this bill ought never to become a law. If they are permitted to make donations, that should be enough. He moved to recommit the bill.
Mr. HARRIS: If townships and counties are allowed to vote subsidies to railroads they should also have the right to make such contracts as may be desirable; and under that theory he was in favor of allowing the enforcement of such contracts. The motion to recommit was agreed to.
The following described bills were read the first time and referred to appropriate com- mittees:
By Mr. SHIRK [S. 389] to amend section 13 of the plank, gravel and McAdam road act of May 12,1852, so as to reduce the rates of toll thereon.
By Mr. REEVE, [S. 390] to prevent certain live stock from running at large--after April 1, 1879, horses, cattle, sheep, mules or asses shall be kept on premises of the owner.
By Mr. HEILMAN, [S. 391] to amend an amendatory act to the common school law, so as to require school superintendents to stand a more rigid examination as to their qualifications.
By Mr. DICE, [S. 392] legalizing the practice of circuit courts in calling causes for issue and in entering judgment on the first day of the term.
The bill [S. 43--Mr. Kahlo's] to exempt the wages of laborers from garnisheement on execution in certain cases, was read the second time, and ordered engrossed for the third reading.
Mr. STREIGHT stated objections, and--
Mr. Viehe could not see that the bill would accomplish any good.
The bill [S. 37--Mr. Weir's] to enable County Commissioners to dispose of orders and allowances uncalled for for the period of five years at March terms, cause the same to be canceled and placed to the credit of the fund from which they should have been paid, was read the second time and ordered engrossed.
The bill [S. 27--Mr. Winterbotham's] to provide for the government and discipline of the State's prisons was read the second time, with a favorable majority and unfavorably minority report thereon.
Mr. WINTERBOTHAM: It is well known that laws governing our prisons are very defective. The object of this bill is to make a law that will be understood by, and give satisfaction to, the people, and fix the manner in which prison directors shall be selected. Now they only hold their positions by suffrage. The only law governing the Prison North is the one under which it was built. He desired the majority report concurred in, and that the bill be considered by sections.
The minority report was rejected, and the majority report was concurred in.
Mr. Streight moved to amend section 2 by providing that the management of both of the
State prisons shall be under three directors. This was the principal amendment he
desired. It would rid the State of three directors, and the three appointed would be
better qualified,
Mr. MENZIES contended there were equally competent business reasons why the amendment should not prevail. The State prisons are situated widely apart, representing almost different interests and different pursuits. By having two boards of directors on may act as a check upon the other. In other words, we would then have two business houses directly across the street from each other. The bill is well drawn in that regard.
Mr. WINTERBOTHAM at first was in favor one board of management for both prisons, but after hearing the argument of the State executive in favor of the two boards--one for each prisons--he was convinced. It is better to let the bill stand as it now reads in that particular.
Mr. BURRELL moved that the bill be referred to a select committee, to consist of Messrs. Winterbotham, Streight, and Viehe.
Mr. Fowler favored the motion. Two years ago he favored consolidating these two boards, and was of the same opinion still. So the same board might compose the workings of the Northern with the workings of the Southern prison. He would like to amend the motion to recommit by adding instructions to consolidate the two boards provided nothing shall interfere with the officers now elected. At the expiration of their terms then let the prisons be under one management.
Mr. STREIGHT: If there are officials in the service of the State not needed let them be legislated out of office. He advocated but one board two years ago, when his party was in power, and it was a bitter pill. There is no necessity for delay. This question might as well be settled now.
Mr. WOOD believed this bill ought to be referred.
Mr. SHAFFER hoped it would not be referred to a special committee. We can consider this bill as well as some day next week.
Mr. PORTER demanded the previous question, which was seconded by the Senate, and under its operation, the motion to refer was agreed to by yeas 19, nays 18.
And then came the recess till 2 o' clock p.m.
On motion by Mr. TRUSLER the bill [S. 187--Mr. Fowler's] amending sections 1, 2, and 20, of the supervisor's act of March 5, 1877--see these reports of January 20--was read the second time, with a committee report recommending its passage. The report was concurred in, and the bill ordered engrossed.
The bill [S. 42--Mr. Moore's] for protection of execution plaintiffs and purchasers at sheriff's sales was read the second time.
Mr. MOORE believed the
Mr. WOOD did not think this bill should pass. The party plaintiff ought to be charged with every irregularity. An outside party should not suffer in such cases, where party to the record should under certain circumstances. Otherwise the party to the record could easily become a party to a collusion.
Mr. HARRIS: If one not a party to the record bid off the property without knowledge of defect, he is not chargeable with any irregularity. As to the parties to the suit, they must know what has occurred. If one of them does not and buys in, he should suffer rather than the judgement defendant, whose property is taken. If we pass this bill, we say in every case where due notice is not given, that the sale stands, and that would be a very dangerous principle--it would be a very broad reaching statute. We had better call a halt here. If this bill had said: Hereafter such a thing may occur, it would not have been so objectionable.
Mr. MOORE expressed a willingness to have the bill amended so it shall be prospective only in its effect.
Mr. REEVE--This bill seeks to put parties who are purchasers on a judgment on the same footing with persons not a party to the record; or, in other words, to overturn the principle that parties shall not be bound by their own negligence but may take advantage of their own negligence. That is the consummation sought for in this bill. Is it best to enact such a law as that? Is it not the fact that the law aims at justice? Is it not the meaning of the code: That law and equity should go side by side, in order that law should be more flexible under the rules of equity? You can not accomplish even handed and exact justice in all things. Such measures as are proposed in this bill are vicious in the extreme.
Mr. STREIGHT: This bill simply declares that the State will be impartial in such cases: that if her officers make a mistake the judgment creditor shall not suffer any more than any other individual. The bill is right, and he hoped the report would not be concurred in.
The committee report was rejected by yeas 20, nays 41.
Mr. MOORE moved to amend by striking out the words "has been or," and also the second section.
Mr. URMSTRON can not support this bill. The plaintiffs is party to the record, and compels the defendant to appear: prosecutes to judgment, orders out an execution--all orders are carried out by officers of the court, and all the officers may be negligent, and thus render the sale void; and while a purchaser not party to record will be considered an innocent purchaser, it is the business of the plaintiff to see there are not mistakes made. This is just the kind of a bill to pass in order to make sheriffs and attorneys more careless. They are careless enough now, and ought to be bound by the strict letter of the law. Attorneys, too, should look after their cases to the last moment. This bill is of a class to impose a hardship upon the debtor class. The man who will obtain a judgment against a poor neighbor may come in at the end under this bill and say, "My title is good, for I am protected the same as in innocent purchaser."
The Senate refused to order the bill engrossed by yeas 16,nays 20.
On motion by Mr. TAYLOR, it was laid on the table.
The bill [S. 47--Mr. Weirs'] to amend section 12 of an act of March 9, 1877, to enable the owners of wet lands to drain and reclaim the same, was read the second time, and ordered engrossed.
The bill [S. 49--Mr. Poindexter's] to prevent the running at large of domestic animals, was read the second time, with a committee report recommending that it lie on the table.
Mr. POINDEXTER insisted that such a law is very much needed in this State. He would like to see the committee report rejected, and the bill ordered engrossed. He asked and obtained leave to have a similar bill [S. 67--Mr. Menzies'] read for information.
Mr. STREIGHT hoped that the committee's report would not be concurred in, and cited circumstances under which such a law would be almost a necessity.
Mr. MENZIES--A large number of farmers are anxious for legislation on this subject, and for that reason he introduced bill 67, copied largely from the Ohio law, which has been in operation for some 12 or 16 years. Where making fences is a great expense, no man should be compelled to build a fence to keep out his neighbor's stock. Such a law as proposed in this bill is demanded by a large number of farmers.
Mr. GARRIGUS hoped the committee report will not be concurred in for the reason that in a very large portion of the State, such a law is demanded by the farming community. The expenditure required to keep up fences is a very great tax upon the agriculturist. The timber of the State is fast passing away, and should be protected. In his county, there were thousands of acres of timber 25 years ago, while to-day it is quite scarce. Every one cultivating the soil, even on a small farm, is obliged to expend hundreds of dollars every year, in order to keep estray cattle or hogs from destroying the crops. A large majority of the 10,000 votes represented by himself desire some law upon this subject, and he urged non concurrence in the report, and the final passage of the bill.
Mr. WIER stated that in the committee, with reference to this bill, there was a diversity of opinion. The bill by the senator from Posey (Mr. Menzies) is the better of the two. A portion of the committee were in favor of one, and others of the other. We finally objected to reporting favorably on either, claiming that the power the county commissioners now have was sufficient, and therefore we report the bills back without recommendation, leaving the Senate to decide as between them.
Mr. WOOD--The present law allowing boards of commissioners to regulate this thing is about right. A bill of this kind would not suit his people at all. In his district, there are thousands of acres used for grazing, and this law would operate as a hardship there. The State is too new to have a law of this kind.
Mr. WILSON stated that the cost of keeping up the fences in the State was in excess of the value of the cattle therein.
Mr. TRUSLER was satisfied that the time is coming, if not here already, when the agricultural community must have a stock law. It will work as a hardship upon some poor people, but for the individual who knows how to till the soil it would be cheaper to keep up stock than to keep fences around the land cultivated. The only question is, what kind of a stock law will be best? He would rather favor the one under consideration than the one offered by the senator from Pose [Mr. Menzies]; but, if geese were excepted form the latter, he would vote for it, also.
Mr. WINTERBOTHAM: The passage of this bill will work great hardships in new portions of this State. Along the Kankake there is a large amount of natural pasturage, and such a bill would reduce many there to poverty. It would be doing very great wrong. It will not meet with the approbation of one man win 10 in his locality.
Mr. REEVE: That bill was introduced on the petition of many in the counties of Laporte and Porter and some from the very broad savannas the senator speaks of.
Mr. WINTERBOTHAM: Land in Laporte county is worth from $50 to $100 an acre in some parts, while in others it is worth but $3 or $4 an acre. He hoped the Senate would not allow the bill to pass. The latter land has been brought into cultivation all within the past few years. This bill is asked for by the rich men, while the poor living in five or six miles of there are opposed to it.
Mr. WOOLEN: The argument here convinced him that it is unwise to pass a general law of this kind applying alike to all parts of the State. In his county there is no demand for such a law. This matter should be left to the county itself. If we have a law that meets all the requirements, why take up time in considering a bill that will not work equity to all?
Mr. TRAYLOR was satisfied a majority are opposed to any such law. It would be a good law for a rich man, but a poor law for a poor man. It is better to compel the rich man to enclose the land desired for cultivation, and let the poor man's stock run at large. It would be an outrage on every poor man to enact such a law. He should vote against it.
Mr. TRAYLOR characterized the bill as part of a movement to oppress the poor. Under its provisions, an old woman in his district has so many geese she would have to employ a herder. [Laughter.] Then, according to the reading of the first section, even cats are prohibited from running at large. [Renewed laughter.] The difference of opinion manifested here is an argument against the passage of such a law as proposed by this bill.
Mr. KRAMER--If this bill could be recommitted and amended so it could be made
effectual, it would be a very desirable act. It is a question whether the people at
large are better able and should be compelled to build fences than to prevent poor
men from keeping stock at all. He knows not of a single county that operates under
the present law
The question being on the report of the Committee recommending that the bill [S. 49] lie on the table. The yeas and nays were demanded, and being ordered an taken, resulted--yeas 16,nays 17.
No quorum voting--after a call of the House--
The Senate adjourned.
After prayer by Rev. Mr. Brindage, of this city, the reading of the journal was dispensed With.
Mr. LEHMAN moved that the House proceed with the call by counties for the introduction of new propositions.
Mr. TULLY objected, insisting that the regular order--reports from committees--should be taken up. He hoped the motion would not prevail.
Mr. GORDON came here to do something for the honor and good of the people, and insisted that reports from committees should be heard, and legislative business got along with.
The motion [Mr. Lehman's] was rejected.
were received and severally concurred in, unless otherwise stated, as follows:
Mr. ENGLISH from a majority of the committee on the affairs of the city of Indianapolis returned the bill [H. R. 295] for a metropolitan police, with amendment, and when so amended recommended its passage.
Mr. LINDLEY submitted a minority report, recommending indefinite postponment.
Mr. HEROD moved that the bill and reports be referred to a special committee of seven.
Mr. LINDLEY thought they ought to go to another committee, as at no distant day it might affect other cities; as we are again on the eve of another United States caucus.
Mr. ENGLISH moved, ineffectully--yeas 39, nays 39--to lay the motion on the table.
The motion to refer the bill and reports to a special committee of seven, was agreed to by yeas 40, nays 39.
The SPEAKER made the committee to consist of Messrs. Herod, English, Hopkins, Robeson, Van Valzah, Willard and Edwins.
Mr. STUCKER, from the
Mr. ALLEN, from the
Also, the bill [H. R. 612] defining the manner in which lands inside of cities and towns may be taxed, recommending indefinite postponement.
On the motion by Mr. TULLEY, the report was laid on the table.
Also, the bill [H. R. 495] to exempt certain lands from taxation in cities and towns, recommending indefinite postponement.
Also, the bill [H. R. 139] to change the time when city taxes shall become a lien, recommending that the bill lie on the table,
Also the bill [S. 101] to repeal the act of March 6, 1865, to authorize the formation of companies for water works in cities, recommending passage. It passed to the third reading.
The committee on roads returned the bill [H. R. 52] in relation to change of public highways, recommending passage. It was ordered engrossed.
Also the bill, [H. R. 71] providing for the selection and appointment of supervisors, recommending that it be indefinitely postponement.
Mr. SAINT thought the bill ought to pass. He drew the bill by instruction from the citizens of his county, who were church-going people. Gravel roads were getting into the hands of monopolies. Until these gravel roads were bought up by capitalists they did not charge toll on Sundays. Their dividends were large enough without charging toll for light travel on Sunday.
Mr. KIRKPATRICK and Mr. VAN PELT said one of the improvements sadly needed was good gravel roads. A11 going to church on Sundays were allowed to pass over the road without pay.
Mr. STUCKER thought if free toll were allowed everybody on Sunday, a great many would do their business on that day.
Mr. HANDY: Corporations making these roads have rights and should be protected in their rights. If this bill should pass, three-fourths of the roads in Hancock county would go down. He hoped the report would be concurred in.
Mr. SAINT: Not a road in the State would go down if light travel were allowed free toll on Sunday. It was a God-given right that the Gospel should pass on the highways free and unmolested.
Mr. Allen, of Putnam, read the statement of a gravel road company in Putnam county, showing that the road paid but 2 to 4 per cent. He thought we should do nothing to discourage that character of improvement.
Mr. VANPELT said one or two roads in his county had to be abandoned because it did not pay to keep them up.
Mr. SLEETH believed 19 out of 20 of the gravel roads were built under the laws of the State, by taxing the owners along the road.
The report of the committee was then concurred in.
The
Mr. SAINT insisted the latter bill ought to be passed. It allowed the county commissioners to purchase and build gravel roads.
On the motion of Mr. SHANKS, the bill was laid on the table.
Also, the bill [H. R. 388] to divide the public highways among the owners of land, recommending indefinite postponement.
On the motion of Mr. TULLEY, the bill was laid on the table.
Also, the bill [H. R. 365] to protect public highways and ditches, with a recommendation that the bill be indefinitely postponed.
On the motion of Mr. WIMMER, the report was laid on the table, and the bill ordered engrossed.
Also, the bill [H. R. 280] fixing the standard grade of gravel and other roads. Also, the bill [H. R. 233] to amend section 20 of an act providing for the election of supervisors of highways, recommending their indefinite postponement.
Also the bill [H. R. 456] to require certain gravel, plank and McAdamizad road companies, to whom was relinquished the right of the State in the so-called National and Cumberland road, to furnish and keep the same in repair, within a certain time. Also the bill [H. R. 473] to legalize errors and imperfections in the description of articles of association in the organization of turnpike and gravel roads, recommending that they do pass. They were severally ordered engrossed.
The House took a recess until 2 o'clock.
The following bills were introduced, read the first time and passed to the second reading:
My Mr. STUCKER [H. R. 550] to define fees, salaries and duties of certain officers therein named.
By Mr. CAREY [H. R. 551] providing for keeping public cemeteries in good order.
By Mr. HUMPHREYS [H. R. 552] to amend the act to establish a house of correction for juvenile offenders.
Mr. HANDY offered a resolution that the
By Mr. SNODDY [H. R. 553] to amend an act to provide record books, etc., for justices of the peace [adding the revised statutes which shall remain the property of the township.]
By Mr. KIRKPATRICK, [H. R. 554] to authorize tax-payers to organize into grave1-road companies.
By Mr. ARNOLD, of Blackford, [H. R. 555] to legalize the election of the common council of Montpelier.
By Mr. CARTER, [H. R. 556] to amend the general practice act, sec. 397.
By Mr. ROOKER, [H. R. 557] making it the duty of the governor to investigate the affairs of any county or other officer.
By Mr. LEHMAN, [H. R. 558] to repeal paragraph 4 of the specific appropriation bill of 1877.
Mr. LEHMAN offered a resolution, which was adopted, fixing Tuesday, February 25, at 4 p. m., to hear argument in favor of woman's suffrage before the Senate and House of Representatives.
By Mr. HOSMER, [H. R. 559] relative to paying taxes in certain cases.
By Mr. EDWINS, [H. R. 560] for the relief of John J. Justice, trustee of Madison township, and his sureties.
By M. SAINT, [H. R. 561] limiting and defining what toll may be charged on gravel or other roads.
By Mr. SAINT, [H. R. 563] relative to pool, billiard and card tables.
By Mr. SAINT, [H. R. 562] to repeal an act to maintain the Soldiers' Home, and regulating the salaries of the officers thereof.
Mr. GORDON returned his bill, [H. R. 532] to provide for the education of colored
children in the common schools--from the
By Mr. ENGLISH, [H. R. 564] to legalize the act of the board of trustees of the town of Woodruff, Marion county.
By Mr. ENGLISH, [H. R. 565] to limit the taxation of towns of less than 25 freeholders.
By Mr. ENGLISH, [H. R. 566] providing for the election of Common Council of towns and cities.
Mr. CONFER offered a resolution that the committee on fees and salaries be Instructed to report a bill for the reduction of the mileage of members of the General Assembly from 20 to 10 cents per mile. He said that he had asked a reduction of mileage because their travel did not cost members that much.
On the motion of Mr. BRIGGS, the resolution was laid on the table.
By Mr. HEROD, [H. R. 587] to amend sec. 7 of an an act to provide for a uniform assessment of taxes--church property above $5,000 to pay taxes.
By Mr. HEROD, [H. R. 568] supplemental to the act providing for a general system of common schools.
By Mr. HEROD, [H. R. 569] authorizing county treasurers to perform the duties of city treasurers.
By Mr. HEROD, [H. R. 570] concerning license to vend foreign merchandize.
By Mr. HEROD, [H. R. 571] equalizing taxation in cities; tax on vehicles to keep up street improvements.
By Mr. GORDEN, [H. R. 572] providing for issuing license for running stationary or locomotive engines.
By Mr. HEROD, [H. R. 573] to increase the pay of prosecuting attorney for criminal courts.
By Mr. HEROD, [H. R. 574] to authorize the placing on record of deaths in certain cases.
By Mr. HEROD, [H. R. 575] to amend section S to repeal all laws now in force regulating the incorporation of cities and towns
By Mr. SCHWEITZER, [H. R. 576] to amend section 3 of the divorce law.
By Mr. MAJOR. [H. R. 577] to repeal an act concerning attorneys' fees.
Mr. MAJOR offered a concurrent resolution that our senators and representatives use their influence for the passage of a law to issue legal tender notes sufficient to pay the back bounty just authorized by Congress to soldiers.
By Mr. THOMPSON, [H. R. 578] for the relief of John R. Robinson, trustee of Union township, Montgomery county.
By Mr. 0SBORNE, of Elkhart, [H. R. 579] to provide for the appointment of a probate commissioner.
By Mr. ALLEN, of Putnum, [H. R. 580] to authorize common councils to elect an overseer of the poor.
By Mr. THOMPSON, [H. R. 581] to amend section one of an act providing for voluntary assignment.
Mr. SKINNER, [H. R. 582] to repeal an act amendatory of section 132 of the general practice act.
Mr. FAULKNER offered a resolution, which was adopted, instructing the committee on fees and salaries to return next Tuesday his bill [H. R. 37] fixing the per diem of members of the General Assembly.
By Mr. SLEETH, [H. R. 583] to authorize incorporate towns to contract for lighting with gas in certain cases,
By Mr. BRIGGS, [H. R. 584] creating a board for settlement of claims of the State for ammunition, etc.
By Mr. BROWN, of Steuben, [H. R. 585] to vacate and sell a portion of the public square in the town of Fremont, Steuben county.
Ry Mr. OSBORNE, of Vermillion, [H. R. 586] to repeal an act regulating interest on judgments.
By Mr. HESS, [H. R. 587] to repeal the act of March 3, 1877, for the incorporation of loan associations.
By Mr. THAYER, [H. R. 588] to amend section 16 of an act to appeal all general laws for the incorporation of cities and towns,
By Mr. CONNOWAY, [H. R. 589] to authorize the township trustee of Union township, in Union county, or his successor, to pay certain indebtedness.
By Mr. MARCH, [H. R. 590] to amend section 584 of the general practice act.
By Mr. DONNELL, [H. R. 591] to amend sec-[tion]
Senate bills were read the first time and passed to the second reading as follows:
The bill [S. 268] to fix the time of holding court in the Second judicial circuit.
The bill [S. 379] legalizing lands annexed to the city of Logansport.
The following described House bills were read the second time by title, and referred to appropriate committees, unless otherwise stated:
Mr. Briggs' [H. R. 549], to amend section 5 of an act to provide for the more speedy trial of causes.
Mr. Golden's [H. R. 548], to amend section 1 of an act to authorize trustees of incorporated towns and cities to levy a tax for school purposes. It was ordered engrossed.
Mr. Golden's [H. R. 547], to amend section 1 and 3 of an act to authorize cities and towns to issue bonds for school purposes. It was ordered engrossed.
Mr. Golden's [H. R. 546], to amend an act for the incorporation of cities and towns. It was ordered engrossed.
Mr. Shank's, [H. R. 545] to provide for the purchase by the State a certain tract of land, to protect the State against loss.
Senate bills were read the second time and referred to appropriate committes, unless otherwise stated, as follows:
The bill [S. 60] to amend sections 6, 7, 44 and 45 of an act to divide the State into judicial circuits--approved March 6, l873.
The bill [S. 303] to amend section 1 of an act to enable farmers to form insurance companies.
The bill [S. 6] legalizing the acknowledging and recording of certain instruments in writing,
The bill [S. 158] concerning married women.
The bill [S. 230] supplemental to an act to establish public libraries.
The bill [S. 9] to promote the science of medicine and surgery.
The bill [S. 80] abolishing certain offices in cities and towns.
The bill [S. 236] in relation to human bodies for dissecting purposes.
The bill [S. 22] to legalize the acts of trustees of the town of New Haven, in Allen county.
The bill [S. 23] to legalize the acts of trustees of the town of Huntington.
The bill [S. 12] concerning the trial of civil causes in circuit courts.
The bill [S. 16] in reference to changes of venue in felony cases.
The bill [S. 277] concerning interest on money.
The order for printing this bill was rescinded on the motion of Mr. Osborne, of Elkhart.
Mr. REICHELDAFER, from the
Mr. DA1LEY, from the
Mr. EDWINS, chairman of the
Mr. OSBORNE, of Elkhart, chairman of the
Mr. EDWINS from the
The House then adjourned until Monday morning 10 o'clock.
The LIEUTENANT GOVERNOR announced prayer by Rev. Dr. B, F. Foster, of the Universalist church.
Petitions were presented for a reduction of fees and salaries of officers, and legal fees of physicians one-half.
The following described bills were introduced, read the first time, (unless otherwise stated) and severally referred to appropriate committees.
By Mr. LANGDON,[S. 393] concerning the effect of a sale of land for the payment of taxes--delinquent taxes to be a continual lien till paid.
By Mr. SHAFFER, [S. 394] to amend an act of March 6, 1877, authorizing school trustees of adjoining townships to establish new school districts, and build school houses therein.
By Mr. WIER, by request, [S. 395] to repeal an act for the protection of the Sabbath,
approved February 28,1855, which on his motion was referred to the
By Mr. WOOLLEN, [S. 396] providing for appointment of county superintendents--by county commissioners on first Monday in June biennially--one who has had at least four years' experience in teaching.
By Mr. KRAMER, [S. 397] amending section 11 of the act defining vagrancy, etc , approved March 15,1877; in relation to the punishment of prostitutes.
By Mr. BRISCOE, [S. 398] defining as a misdemeanor the leasing of houses or buildings for the purposes of prostitution
By Mr. TAYLOR, [S. 399] to provide for the submission to the qualified voters of the State, for their ratification or rejection, the proposed amendments to the State constitution.
By Mr. FOWLER. [S. 400] regulating the purchase of articles for the benevolent and reformatory institutions, providing for publishing of notices for bids from contractors for the term of one year.
By Mr. MENZIES, by request, [S. 401] to amend section 8 of the act to repeal all laws in force for the incorporation of cities, etc., approved March 14,1867, as amended by the act of March, 1877--authorizing marshals and, if expedient, auditors and police judges for cities, mayors and city officers and councilmen to hold four years.
By Mr. LANGDON, by request, [S. 402] to provide for the painting, repairing,
enclosing, etc., of the Tippecanoe battle ground, appointing John A. Hull
superintendent thereof, which on his motion was referred to the
By Mr. FOWLER, [S. 403] to amend sec. 12 of the divorce law.
By Mr. COMSTOCK, [S. 404] to amend sec. 4 of the act fixing the pay of judges of the courts of this States:--for superior judges $2,500.
By Mr. DICE, [S. 405] to amend sec. 68 of the general practice act of June 18,1852.
By Mr. BURRELL, [S. 406] to provide for the dissolution of city incorporations of less than 3,000. One-third of the tax-payers may order an election to determine.
By Mr. GARR1GUS, [S. 407] to amend sec. 7 of the act authorizing county commissioners to construct, gravel and McAdam roads, etc., approved March 3,1877, making it their duty to keep up repairs.
By Mr. STREIGHT, [S. 408] for the assessment of real property in the year 1879 and every four years thereafter.
By Mr. HARRIS, by request, [S. 409] to provide for the payment of semi-annual interest on county bonds.
By Mr. WOOD, [S. 410] to declare that county printing snail be done in two papers of opposite politics, in each county, having the largest circulation, the legal fees to be divided between them.
By Mr. FOWLER, [S. 411] to amend section 15 of the act of May 20, 1852, concerning the partition of lands.
By Mr. LANGDON, by request, [S. 412] to amend section 355 of the general practice act.
By Mr. FOWLER. [S 413] to prevent the mutilation or alteration of any instrument of writing with intent to cheat or defraud another.
By Mr. GARRIGUS, [S. 414] to amend num-[erous]
Mr. LANGDON offered a resolution directing the secretary of the Senate to keep on hand a limited supply of lithographed letter heads and envelopes for the use of the Senate.
It was rejected by yeas 17, nays 19.
The Senate took a recess till 2 o'clock p.m.
By Mr. POINDEXTER, [S. 415] to legalize the incorporation of the town of Ohio
trails, and each and every official act of the several board a of trustees thereof;
which, on his motion, was referred to the
By Mr. POINDEXTER, [S. 416] to provide for the issuing of licenses to manage
locomotive or stationary engines: for the appointment [by the governor] of license
inspectors [one in each congressional district], which, on his motion, was referred to
the
By Mr. W1LSON, [H. R. 417] to authorize individuals to keep skiffs, boats and other
water craft on the Ohio river, and to convey persons across said river, and to let the
same thereon for hire; which was, on his motion, referred to the
By Mr. MOORE, [S. 418] to authorize boards of comity commissioners to indorse railroad bonds, where counties and townships have voted aid, not to exceed the amount so voted.
By Mr. SMITH, by request, [S. 419] to discourage the keeping of worthless and
sheep-killing dogs--and providing for the registration and licensing of dogs--after
May 1, 1879--$1 for every male, and $3 for every female over six months old--which, on
his motion, was referred to the
On motion, by Mr. FOWLER, the Senate preceded to the consideration of the bill [S. 27--Mr. Winterbotham's] for the government of the State prisons, which was returned from the select committee this morning, with a majority report [Messrs. Winterbotham and Viehe's] recommending amendments, and a minority [Mr. Streight's] reporting a substitute.
Mr. STREIGHT announced an agreement in the committee not to dispense with the present prison directors. Advocating but one board, he was willing to pay each director an increase of $100 a year, making the one board cost $1,800, while now the two boards cost $3,000. The wardens of these prisons virtually run the prisons. The directors usually take a good dinner with the wardens, and report things going along all right. He would, give these directors enough to do to interest them, and he would have a better class of men than heretofore. Where is the sound business reason for employing six men as directors for the State's prisons when the number well qualified for such positions are not very great. He hoped the friends of economy and good business management, would vote for the minority report. He also favored the appointment of a clerk for each of the prisons who would not owe his position to the warden. The State should have an agent in the clerk. As now, the warden has the management of the prison and the appointment of the clerk, which custom ought to be changed.
Mr. VIEHE: The committee has agreed upon the whole bill, with two exceptions--in the second section, providing for two boards, and in a subsequent section, with regard to the appointment of clerk to the prisons. The material question is: Shall there be two boards or one board of directors? If we have two there will be rivalry between the two prisons, and a healthy competition. As far as expense is concerned, it can make but little, if any, difference. If there is but one board the traveling expenses would perhaps be nearly as much as under the present plan; and then the salary must be increased, as the eirectors will have additional labor to perform. There never should be a time when men may come to the Legislature and electioneer for this office.
Mr. REEVE, by consent, offered a resolution declaring it the sense of the Senate that there shall be a separate Board for each of the State Prisons under the bill now being considered.
The resolution was adopted by yeas 26, nays 11.
Mr. FOWLER, explaining his affirmative vote--Because this bill is of such great importance he did not want to place anything in the way of its passage--there being some doubt about the validity of an act consolidating the two Boards of Directors--though still believing that a consolidation of the two Boards would be better for the institutions and for the State.
By consent, a resolution was offered that the clerk for each of the prisons shall be appointed by the bord of directors under this bill.
Mr. WINTERBOTHAM--Put in a clerk independent of the warden and you will have two heads to the institution. The wardens are held responsible for the management of the State's prison. He should be the head of the institution, and he should appoint his own clerk. He hoped the resolution would be rejected. Put a clerk between the warden and the financial affair of the institution, and confusion would follow. It would be one of the worst features that can be put in the bill.
Mr. STREIGHT: Let the warden appoint a clerk under obligations to him, and there is danger of favoritism. The clerk has nothing to do but keep the accounts. He should not be permitted to go inside the prison, except by permission. The clerk should be answerable only to the board of directors. We hear that the management of these prisons have not been honest; and, why? Because there has been nothing between the State and the warden. The clerk should be entirely independent of the local management of the prison.
Mr. FOSTER moved to amend by making the directors elective by the General Assembly at the present session. The people sent us here for that purpose, and he was not disposed to put that responsibility on the shoulders of the governor.
Mr. VIEHE thought the governor represents the people also. We come here to make law and for no other purpose. He opposed the amendment.
Mr. STREIGHT: Any one witnessing the scramble for these offices at every session can not but conclude the governor can weigh the matter better and make appointments more carefully.
Mr. GARRIGUS dissented from the idea that the governor represents the people as much as the General Assembly. If the governor is to appoint directors, and they the warden, would it not be better to turn the whole State over to the governor, and let him appoint members of the legislature also? He favored the amendment.
The amendment [Mr. Foster's] was rejected by yeas 6, nays 36.
Mr. TRAYLOR moved to amend sec. 3 by making the salary of directors $300 a year instead of $500. They only make about one visit a month, and that would give them a larger per diem than members of the General Assembly.
Mr. GARRIGUS favored the amendment. It was agreed to by yeas 32, nays 9.
Mr. WOOD, in explanation of his negative vote, while representing a constituency that demand a cutting of all salaries, from the governor down, yet thinking men fit for these positions will not serve for $300, he was compelled to place himself against their wishes in this instance.
Mr. BURRELL moved to reduce the salary of warden from $1,500 to $1,000.
Mr. Winterbotham: One thousand dollars would not pay the expense of some wardens in entertaining the people of the State visiting the prison. To say he shall act penurious toward the citizens of the State is doing what Mr. W. is not willing to do. In Illinois the warden has $2,500 and everything furnished. Our wardens have to furnish their own houses--the State gives them fuel and house-room, and that is all.
Mr. HARRIS thought the recommendation of the committee ($1,500) is right.
The amendment was rejected and the committee amendment agreed to.
Mr. BURRELL moved to reduce the salary of physician from $1,000 to $600. This officer only goes around among the prisoners once a day and attends as usual to his outside business.
Mr. SHAFFER: It requires a well educated physician to perform the duties and he is liable to be called at any hour of the day or night. The northern prison physician can not get time to do any private practice to speak of. If that is the case, the salary is too low. He hoped the salary would not be reduced. He would rather see it increased.
Mr. REILEY knew of some 15 or 20 cases, two years ago in the northern prison, that required treatment, and the physician, authorized, did not know how to manage them. He insisted the salary should be sufficiently large to command the services of a competent man. It is due as an act of common justice, and required by every instinct of humanity, that a well-read physician should be kept in such positions.
Mr. REEVE--If a competent physician should prescribe for 15 or 20 a day at 10 cents apiece it would be $2 a day, and that would amount to $730 a year. Physicians usually get a dollar for every office prescription, and $2 for every visit. The proposition now is to give him $600 a year. To make it consistent he should be compelled to live in the prison and be fed on mush and milk, where he should be required to eat with a pegging awl, out of a jug. [Laughter.]
The amendment was rejected.
Mr. STREIGHT moved to amend section 15 by providing that all corporal punishment shall be inflicted in the presence of the chaplain or the surgeon.
Mr. WINTERBOTHAM opposed the amendment and expressed surprise that a military man should offer it. It would be one of the worst amendments that could be made to the bill.
The amendment was agreed to by yeas 22, nays 19.
Mr. WOOLEN moved an amendment that the use of the cat shall not be permitted in any prison in this State, regarding it as a relic of barbarism, and one we ought to be ashamed of. He hoped Indiana would abolish, where it refers to helpless prisoners, the terrible cat which comes down on the back till the flesh quivers and the blood oozes out of the flesh. Other methods of punishment certainly would work as well. There is something horrifying in punishing a man with the cat till the blood oozes from him. This bill has nothing in it to prevent the use of the cat,
Mr. REEVE--There are some people so brutal that nothing will subdue them but the whip and the sack. All that is necessary escape the whip is to behave. The whip is dreaded and is an effective punishment for those so brutal they care for nothing, and have no hope for the future. The cat and whip are a necessity.
Mr. WINTERBOTHAM: The object of all punishment is to compel obedience to the rules with the least delay and with the least injury to the prisoner. This sort of morbid sympathy abolished the cat in Illinois and Ohio a few years ago, and since then, in the former two and in the latter three, have been punished to death. What punishment will you resort to to bring these prisoners to subjection? These wardens know public sympathy is with the prisoner, and it is this that returns men to the penitentiary--because you make the punishment so easy. He was always opposed to capital punishment, until recently he has become convinced it is a necessity, because of this morbid sympathy.
Mr. LANGDON: The question is, whether the cat answers the purposes for which it is used? He believed it destruciive of the ends and purposes for which it was intended, and subversive of the fundamental law of the State. Spectacles of brutality have been repeated time and time again in both the penitentiaries of this State. Other means have been found in this enlightened age--awaken, the humanity, instead of brutalizing them, and sending them out into communities again disgusted with laws and full of vengeance.
Mr. MENZIES: The cat was abolished in the army and navy because soldiers and seamen enlisted to defend society, and the distinction was made between such and the thief, the tramp and those guilty of crimes unmentionable--the depraved, demoralized and debased classes of society. It is not well to indulge in too much sentimentality and gush in this matter.
Mr. TREAT--The agument in favor of the use of the cat is based on the principle that it is part of the punishment due for crime. That is a mistake; it is no part of the punishment allowed by law. It is simply an arbitrary use of power by the wardens. The fact is, as civilization and Christianity advanced, society improved, and these old forms of punishment were lain aside as unworthy of humanity. Punishment by flogging is repulsive to society at large, and he hoped Indiana will not be the home and asylum of this inhuman practice. If we allow the use of the cat, the ware en may become a despot and a tyrant, and abuse his power.
The previous question was demanded by Mr. FOSTER, and being seconded by the Senate under its operation the amendment [Mr. Woollen's] was agreed to by--yeas 22, nays 19.
Then the Senate adjourned.
On motion of Mr. EDWINS the reading of the journal was dispensed with.
Mr. HUMPHREYS, from the
Mr. HUMPHREYS, from the
The SPEAKER proceeded with the call by counties for the introduction of new propositions.
By Mr. COMPTON, [H. R. 593] to amend the first and fourth sections of an act to authorize aid in the construction of railroads.
By Mr. STUCKER, [H. R. 594] to amend section 5 of an act supplemental and amendatory of an act to provide for a uniform assessment of real estate.
By Mr. STUCKER, [H. R. 595] to exempt from taxation one dog for each householder.
By Mr. STUCKER, [H. R. 596] to amend section 7 of an act providing for the organization of county boards.
By Mr. KIRKPATR1CK, [H. R. 597] to encourage the building of tree grave1 roads, and to purchase roads already constructed.
By Mr. KIRKPATRICK, [H. R. 598] in relation to malfeasance or embezzlement--a felony.
By Mr. CONFER, [H. R. 599] to reduce the mileage of members of the General Assembly to 10 cents.
By Mr. MAJOR, [H. R. 600] to amend section 18 of an act regulating decents and apportionment of estates.
By Mr. JOHNSON, [H. R. 601] to prohibit any shed, booth, etc., for the purpose of people of people congregating therein from being used to sell intoxicating liquors.
By Mr. JOHNSON [H. R. 602] to repeal an act to make out and publish annual statements of gravel roads.
By Mr. SKINNER, [H. R. 603] to discourage the keeping of useless and sheep killing dogs.
By Mr. GAROUTTE, [H. R. 604] regulating the stoppage of passenger trains at all stations of cities or incorporate towns.
By Mr. KESTER, [H. R. 605] to provide punishment for giving false weights in coal, corn, etc.--shall be guilty of petty larceny.
Mr. VAN VALZAH, from the
Mr. TULLEY, from the
The bills [S. 379] legalizing the platted territory to the city of Logansport, and [S. 268] to fix the time of holding courts in the Second judicial court, were read the second time.
All the new bills introduced yesterday (Saturday) from 550 to 591 inclusive were severally read the second time and referred to appropriate committees.
Pending the reading of which--Mr. HERROD introduced a concurrent resolution which was adopted that the expense of the committee from the General Assembly of the state of Ohio visiting our female reformatory institute by paid out of the money appropriated for the General Assembly.
Then came a recess till 2 o'clock.
Mr. CONNER, from the
On motion by Mr. OVERMEYER the bill and report was laid on the table, and 200 copies ordered printed.
On the motion of Mr. ENGLISH his bill [H. R. 3], and the committee report thereon, for the re-appraisement of real estate in 1879, was taken up.
Mr. English thought the provisions were so plain, it did not need an argument in favor of its passage. There was no measure the people demanded more now than for a re-appraisement of real estate. Other property is appraised on the 1st of Aril, and he thought real estate should be appraised at the same time. Under the appraisement of 1875 real estate was appraised for near twice the amount of its real value, and he was informed that it was the same all over the State. The bill will cause no additional expense to appraise in 1879 instead of 1880 He would be the last man to favor capital as against the small real estate owners of our State. He held it the duty of the General Assembly to reduce expenses as far as possible. He asked no discrimination in favor of the land-owner, but wanted them put at least upon an equal footing. [Mr. English's remarks in full appear elsewhere in our columns.]--Ed. Sentinel.
Mr. STEVENS said every one was aware that real estate had shrunk fully one-half. Personal property way appraised yearly. There was no good reason why we should not have a re-appraisement of real estate in 1879. The people holding real estate are paying more than their proportion of the taxes. He thought this bill ought to pass. No man can hide his real estate, yet there is a great deal of personal property hid away hence the burden falls on the land owner without a chance for a just valuation.
Mr. HUMPHREY thought it a proposition every one could understand. Next year the land would be re-appraised in the regular way and he did not see why we should insist upon a re-appraisement in 1879. If it requires 12 cents on the $100 now, and you are appraise real estate in 1879 it will likely be reduced 50 per cent ,which will require a levy of 24 per cent. to raise the amount of revenue necessary to carry on the State Governments. A re-appraisement would help him, but if it is done you will have a deficency of $500,000 in 1880. He hoped the bill would not pass.
Mr. HOPKINS thought the taxes on real and personal property should be equal. Real estate ought to be re-appraised, for as it now is the burden of the taxes falls upon real estate owners.
Mr. WILLARD--The main objection he had to re-appraisement was the impossibility of making a levy now in anticipation of a re-appraisement in 1879. What would be the result? The re-appraisement of land would reduce the revenue so low you would not be able to sustain the benevolent institutions of the State. If it is made now we are in the dark for one year, for it will be impossible to make a levy to suit the appraisement
Mr. HART did not see what would be gained by a re-appraisement. He thought it would cost more to appraise real estate now than it would l880. It was bad policy to urge a re-appraisement now.
Mr. HEROD said real estate was appraised very much too high, and the appraisement should therefore be made in 1879. It would be no very great stretch of authority to bridge over any small deficit that may occur in the revenue. There ought to be some way to reach the notes, mortgages, etc., that escape taxation. He wanted all property to bear its just proportion of tax. If the levy is insufficient, the governor can. provide for all the wards of the State, as has been done before. He was in favor of the bill.
Mr. FAULKNER said there was no farmer asking for a re-appraisement of the real estate, and it did him good to see these city landholders asking for it.
Mr. ALLEN of Putnam said the last conversation he had with a farmer in his county he
had implored him for God's sake to pass a bill
Mr. SLEETH said in his portion of the State farmers would he willing to sell their farms for less than half the appraisement. It was an unfair discrimination in favor of personal property. What we want is an equitable assessment. Real estate owners are paying on more than they are worth. There is a universal demand in his county for a re-appraisement, and he wanted to see a uniform and equal valuation of property.
Mr. BAKER was in favor of a re-appraisement in 1879. It was an evident fact that the people all over the State demanded it.
Mr. WORKS said that real estate was appraised far beyond its value, while personal
property was appraised at its real value, which was an unfair discrimination. It was
injustice to allow this to remain so, and he was in favor of the passage of a bill. It
may not facilitate the
Mr. SHANKS--As it is known that real property had depreciated 50 per cent., let the
Mr. DAILEY thought the report of the committee ought to be concurred in. He did not think the people of the State would suffer much by awaiting the regular appraisement in 1880. He thought, perhaps the real estate to-day was appraised at about what it ought to be. He opposed the bill on the ground that we could not tell how much of a levy to make to meet the demands of the State.
Mr. OWEN had been urged, by citizens of his county, to favor an early re-appraisement.
Mr. HANDY was opposed to the bill, for the reason that is you re-appraise now you would be compelled to raise the levy from 12 to perhaps 25 or 30 per cent. He was for sustaining the credit of the State, which he thought would not be done under a re-appraisement. It was shown that real estate had gone down 25 or 50 per cent.
Mr. STUCKER failed to see any advantage in a re-appraisement in 1879. If the appraisement should reduce real estate it would not affect the result. We have just so much to raise to run the State or township, and the money would have to be raised, and he did not see where would be the benefit.
Mr. KIRKPATRICK thought we ought to give the
Mr. MARCH said too much personal property was concealed, and if a full appraisement of money, bonds, etc., could be brought out and taxed at its true value, it would go far to rem- edy the matter Put the property upon an equal basis so there shall be no dodging--there was where the difficulty lay.
Mr. TULLEY: The great complaint was thousands of dollars that had been loaned out did not find its way upon the tax duplicate. If a law could be passed to regulate this, there would be no need of a re-appraisement of real estate. He favored the adoption of the report of the committee.
Mr. HUMPHREY said the
Mr. ENGLISH said the constitution gave the governor full power to borrow money to carry on the State Government.
The report of the committee was then rejected--yeas 31, nays 38--and the bill was ordered engrossed.
The select committee thereon returned the bill [H. R. 73] to create an asylum for feeble minded children, with amendment, and when so amended recommend its passage.
The report was concurred in by--yeas 42, nays 29.
Mr. LEHMAN, from the
On the motion of Mr. SLEETH the House took up the bill [H. R. 158] in relation to settlements made by boards of county commissioners. The bill was read the third time.
Mr. SLEETH says the bill does not affect the security law as it now stands. It simply allows the books to be opened, and an adjustment made by either a deficit or overplus.
The bill passed the House of Representatives by yeas 69, nays 0.
Mr. DAILY, from the
Mr. OSBORNE, of Elkhart, from the
Mr. SHANKS, from the
The report and bill was laid on the table, and 200 copies ordered printed.
The House then adjourned until 9 o'clock to-morrow morning.
Prayer by Rev. SAMUEL K. HOSHOUE, of the Church of Christ.
The reading of the minutes was dispensed with.
On motion by Mr. FOWLER the Senate concurred in the House resolution authorizing payment of expenses incident to the proper reception of members of the standing committees of the Ohio legislature on reformatory schools for boys and girls, who are expected to visit the Female Reformatory prison, near Indianapolis, at an early day.
The LIEUTENTANT GOVERNOR announced his appointment of Daniel Diffley as a page, in the place of Arthur Moody, resigned.
Mr. LANGDON offered a resolution embracing an entire redistricting of the State for congressional purposes.
On motion by Mr. MENZIES--yeas 26, nays 24--the resolution and the entire subject of congressional and legislative apportionment, being the special order for this hour. was postponed,and made the special order for day after to-morrow at 10 o'clock a. m.
Mr. REEVE, rising to a personal explanation, (having obtained indefinite leave of absence on account of the death of his mother) stated that a week ago yesterday, when the drainage bill [S. 17] was under consideration, he felt called upon the discuss its merits with some earnestness and considerable vehemence. Through several papers in the State the Impression has gone abroad that he resorted to some profanity in his remarks at that time, when, after delineating the injustice of the attempt to transfer to irresponsible individuals the right of eminent domain and denouncing the absolute infamy of attempting to do such a thing, showing them principles that underlie such an attempt, and seeking to portray to some extent the results, he made use of this language: "Damn such legislation, and the names of the men or persons who first attempted to inject it into the laws of this State ought to be damed to eternal infamy." He was not in the habit of using profane language in any public speech, but he borrowed this from the great Master himself--using the words "damn such legislation" in a legitimate sense; that it should be condemned beyond all possibility of forgiveness; lost beyond the power of being found; put out of sight beyond all possibility of recovery; just as the Master himself says, "He who believeth not on Me shall be damned." It was the farthest thought from him to express the least irreverent idea, or to utter the least possible profanity.
On motion by Mr. WINTERBOTHAM the Senate proceeded to the consideration of his State Prison bill [S. 27].
On motion by Mr. REEVE section 15 was amended so that the man who has cause of complaint shall not be the one to inflict punishment on the convict.
Mr. FOWLER moved to amend sec. 17 so that a light shall be allowed to convicts by which they can read and write till 9 o'clock at night.
Mr. URMSTON: saw no impropriety in the amendment.
Mr. HEFRON thought the amendment should not be made obligatory. It would not be proper to furnish lights to insane convicts. At his suggestion the word "sane" was incorporated in the amendment.
The amendment was then agreed to.
Mr. FOSTER moved to amend section 21 by inserting "$15" instead of allowing tho convict on discharge, "money to take him to place of conviction, and a good plain suit of clothes."
Mr. WINTERBOTHAM--The $15 is usually spent in dissipation, as soon as the convict leaves the prison. The bill, as it stands, is best.
Mr. FOSTER urged his amendment as carrying out a custom long established.
Mr REEVE offered a substitute: "Unless his earnings shall have furnished him sufficient means to take him to the place of conviction."
Mr. STREIGHT--Convicts should have a chance for making an honest living after getting
out of the prison; and they must have
Mr. TRUSLER opposed both the amendments.
Mr. FOWLER thought the provisions in the bill were sufficiently liberal, and ought to stand as it now is.
Mr. LEEPER moved to appropriately insert the words "or to his place of residence, if within the State."
Mr. URMSTON favored the amendment.
Mr. MENZIES regarded the State as under no obligation to land the convict safely in the bosom of his family. If the State sends him back to the place of conviction, that is ample.
Mr. DICE regarded the amendment as humane, and one that ought to be agreed to.
Mr. URMSTON moved to amend the amendment by inserting the word "residence" in place of the word "conviction."
Mr. LEEPER withdrew his, being satisfied with this amendment.
It was rejected.
Mr. BURRELL moved to reconsider the vote, fixing the pay of directors at $300; $500 is not too much, unless all the other officials are reduced.
Mr. FOSTER could see nothing in the bill compelling the directors to assemble oftener than once a year unless called together by the warden; that being so, $300 was enough.
Mr. VIEHE favored the motion, being satisfied the bill should be amended so as to provide for monthly meetings.
Mr. F0STER: If that provision is placed in the bill, he would favor the $500 salary.
Mr. TAYLOR opposed the motion; even if the directors were compelled to visit the prisons once a month $300 would be enough.
Mr. WINTERBOTHAM: The provision requiring monthly modelings is absolutely necessary in order that the directors may have a proper oversight of these prisons, and $500 is but very poor compensation.
Mr. STREIGHT believed the directors should be compelled to visit the prison once a month. At $300 a year they got $25 for each visit, which is enough.
Mr. REEVE: The directors should be men of good business capacity, and should be allowed four days time for each visit, and at least $500 a year salary.
The motion [Mr. Burrell's] to reconsider was agreed to by--yeas 25, nays 22.
Then came the recess till 2 o'clock.
Mr. KRAMER made an ineffectual motion--yeas 11, nays 39--to amend the amendment, by striking out "$300" and inserting in lien $400.
The question recurring on the original amendment to the bill, striking therefrom. $500 and inserting $300 in lieu, it was agreed to by--yeas 26, nays 21.
On motion by Mr. VIEHE the vote by which section 10 was adopted was reconsidered, and he moved to amend, so as to require the presence of the directors at the prisons at least once a month.
Mr. HEFRON saw no propriety in absolutely requiring these directors to appear at the prison once a month, unless their duties require it, especially as their salary has been reduced.
Mr. STREIGHT favored the amendment.
Mr. FOWLER moved to amend the amendment by making the visit imperative once every two months,
Mr. WINTERBOTHAM favored the amendment to the amendment, inasmuch as the directors are allowed but $300 a year.
The amendment to the amendment was agreed to by--yeas 29. nays 20.
Mr. REEVE moved to reconsider the vote by which the amendment was adopted, requiring the physician or chaplain to be present whenever a convict is punished.
Mr. STREIGHT opposed the motion. There is nothing in the bill to prevent a great abuse of power if that provision be stricken out. No man should be permitted to inflict punishment without the presence of wit- nesses, who may report any inhumanity, and prevent bad men from perpetrating outrages.
Mr. WINTERBOTHAM thought that we had perfected a very good bill as far as it has gone, but this is one of the worst provisions ever engrafted in a prison bill. It makes three heads. It is as much as saying to the warden: "You are not capable of enforcing discipline without the presence of the physician or chaplain." It will be injurious to the discipline of the prisons, and if not expunged, he should vote against the bill.
Under the operations of the previous question, demanded by Mr. WILSON, the motion to reconsider was agreed by yeas 25, nays 22.
The question recurring on the original amendment, requiring the physician or chaplain to be present whenever corporal punishment is inflicted on a convict.
Mr. REEVE voted for the amendment, because, in this bill, the cat was authorized to be used, but after the cat was abolished, he could see a thousand evils that would grow out of this clause. He thought it not only superfluous, but dangerous.
Messrs. COFFEY and FOSTER explaining--Since the cat has been stricken from the bill they would vote against this amendment.
The amendment was rejected by yeas 22, nays 25.
On motion of Mr. BURRELL, a substitute for section 26 was adopted providing that directors elected at this session are to take their offices to which they were elected ,and the director holding over shall continue in office for the term for which he was elected; and on his further motion the amendments were considered engrossed, the bill read the third time, and finally passed the Senate by yeas 48, nays 0.
The bill, [S. 393--Mr. Langdon's] concerning the sale of land for the payment of taxes--delinquent tax shall be a continual lien--was read the second time, with a favorable report from a committee, the author urging its passage.
Mr. VIEHE doubted the propriety of passing this measure.
Mr. KRAMER thought there should be some legislation on this subject, and this bill a step in the right direction.
Mr. HARRIS could not see that this bill would do any good, or help the State to obtain delinquent taxes.
Mr. WOOD did not think it good policy to pass such a measure as this. It would prevent the sale of property for taxes, where burdened with delinquencies, to a great extent, The report of the committee was concurred in by--yeas 28, nays 11.
Mr. TAYLOR called up his motion submitted yesterday to change the rule, and so much of it as provides for meeting at 9 o'clock in the forenoon was agreed to.
The following described House bills were read the first time and referred to appropriate committees:
H. R. 9, regulating the setting up of corner
stones in public highways; H. R. 7,
regulating the working of coal mines; H. R.
14, concerning public cemeteries; H. R.
15, for an Edinburg town legalizing act; H. R. 17, to repeal railroad aid
acts; H. R. 35, to amend section 61
The House resolutions for instruction to congressmen to favor a law allowing farmers to sell tobacco raised by themselves without license, was indefinitely postponed, on motion by Mr. HEILMAN; as was also the House resolution looking to a reduction of salaries of Federal officers, on the motion of Mr. HARRIS.
The following described bills were read the first time (unless otherwise stated), and severally referred to appropriate committees:
By Mr. SHIRK [S. 420) to amend section 24 of the act establishing the House of Refuge, so as to allow the commissioners $300 a year.
By Mr. TRAYLOR, by request, [S. 421] concerning parties to actions.
By Mr. GRUBBS, by request, [S. 422] to amend section 18 of the decedent and apportionment of estates acts.
By Mr. MENZIES, [S. 423] to amend section 1 of the act regulating foreign insurance companies, which, on his motion, was referred without reading.
The bill [S. 24--Mr. Kramer's] to avoid a second subpoena in cases of continuance, was read a second time.
Mr. KRAMER insisted that this bill would obviate a good deal of expense.
Mr. BURRELL regarded it as needless law citing reasons.
Mr. VIEHE also opposed the bill.
Mr. GRUBBS deemed the bill utterly impracticable--it would involve the courts in inextricable confusion, and be a dead letter on the statute books.
On motion by Mr. BURRELL, it was indefinitely postponed.
On motion by Mr. BURRELL, his bill [S.180] that non-resident notices shall be printed in one weekly newspaper only, was read the second time, he insisting that this was a change in the line of propriety and right.
The Senate adjourned.
The session was opened with prayer by Mr. Mitchell, representative from the county of Washington.
The reading of the journal was dispensed with.
New bills for acts were introduced--
By Mr. BLISS, [H. R. 606] to amend section 56 of an act defining misdemeanors; and--
By Mr. HUTHSTEINER, [H. R. 607] to amend section 467 of the practice act.
Mr. OSBORNE'S, of Elkhart county, resolution fixing Wednesday of each week for the consideration of bills on the third reading, was adopted.
The
Mr. OVERMEYER moved that the sheriff shall receive 40 cents a day, where there is but one prisoner.
Mr. OSBORNE, of Elkhart, demanded a division of the question, and said he was in favor of striking out the reference to population ; but he thought 30 cents per day was enough.
The House then, by consent, struck out the reference to population.
Mr. ALLEN, of Putnam, thought a reduction to 40 cents would compare favorably with. the price of board. He did not want to make it penurious. He was in favor of what was fair.
Mr. HEROD said sheriffs had to clean out the jail, furnish light, etc., at their own expense. He was in favor of the amendment.
Mr. EDWINS was in favor of the bill as reported by the committee.
Mr. OVERMEYER'S amendment was then agreed to.
Mr. OVERMEYER offered a further amendment that sheriffs may receive 30 cents per day when more than two prisoners were confined at one time.
Mr. BRIGGS moved to amend by substituting five for two.
Mr. SAINT was sure that 100 men could be fed cheaper than five. He was in favor of the amendment.
Mr. WATSON was in favor of 40 cents a day, and would favor amendments to the bill in other particulars.
The amendment was agreed too--affirmative 52, negative not counted.
Mr. LINDLEY moved to strike out the words "or jailor," which was agreed to, and the bill was ordered engrossed.
Mr. WORKS, from the same committee, returned the bill H. R. 286, prescribing the duties of coroners; H. R. 393, defining embezzlement; H. R. 426, to whom certain costs shall be paid, with favorable reports thereon, and the bills were engrossed.
Mr. MARCH, from the same committee, returned the bill H. R. 229, touching the relation of guardian and ward. He said the object was to have an itemized account returned every two years.
Mr. STUCKER thought the object was to protect the ward against loss, and provide that, the sureties and others can examine and see how the account stands.
Mr. SLEETS offered a proviso, which was adopted, "in case the amount does not exceed $500." The bill was ordered engrossed.
Also, [H. R. 119] providing for the election of justices of the peace, etc. It was ordered engrossed.
Mr. SHANKS, from the same committee, returned the resolution in relation to the abolition of the grand jury system, reporting it as inexpedient to abolish that system. The report was concurred in.
Mr. BRIGGS, from the
Mr. MIERS, from the
Mr. EDWINS, from a minority of the
Mr. WIMMER hoped the report of the minority would not be adopted.
Mr. DRAKE thought if there was a bill before this Legislature that should pass, it was this one.
Mr. HUBBARD believed this bill, or one like it, ought to pass. It gives the commissioners authority to say who shall carry concealed weapons.
Mr. EDWINS thought that by this act you license irresponsible parties--worthy men will not apply for a permit to carry deadly weapons.
Mr. WORKS was in favor of passing a bill that would increase the penalty we now have. He thought no person ought to be licensed to carry weapons.
Mr. THAYER said three-fourths of the murders committed were the result, of carrying concealed weapons. He hoped the bill would pass. There was no need of any one carrying weapons.
Mr. JOHNSON hoped the House would not concur in the report.
The minority report was then rejected.
Mr. MARCH moved that the bill be recommitted to the same committee, with instruction to report to-morrow.
Mr. SAINT thought it had been fully discussed and ought to be disposed of at once. He was in favor of the bill
Mr. HEROD--There were a number of citizens in the transaction of businesses in which it is necessary to carry weapons.
Mr. TAYLOR of Daviess hoped the motion would prevail.
The motion to recommit was agreed to.
The same committee returned a majority report upon the bill [H. R. 22] for a homestead, recommending indefinite postponement.
A minority report, was also submitted, with amendments, for $500 exemption, and when so amended, recommending its passage.
Mr. OVERMEYER was willing to increase the existing law from $300 to $500. That will be enough for the present.
Mr. SHANKS moved to amend by striking out "$500" and inserting "$1,500." This amendment was laid on the table--yeas 64. nays 27.
Mr JOHNSON moved to amend by striking out $500 and inserting $1,000.
Mr. SAINT was in favor of the amendment because he believed an exemption of $1,000 would benefit all classes. It will encourage the laboring class to provide themselves a home, and it will not be long until that home will be worth more than $1,000.
A motion to lay the amendment on the table was rejected--yeas 38, nays 51.
The amendment was then adopted.
Mr. OSBORNE, of Elkhart, thought this was now in shape that the House could and ought to act upon it.
Mr. OWEN moved to refer the bill and amendments to the
The motion was agreed to.
Then came the recess till 2 o''clock,
Mr. WILLARD, from the
Mr. OSBORNE, of Elkhart, presented an additional amendment. And on his suggestion the bill was read by sections.
Mr.-------- proposed to amend the first section so as to increase the salary of county treasurers and clerks from $1,000 to $1,500.
Mr. Briggs said the clerk can not afford to take the office for less than $1,500. He was in favor of the amendment.
Mr. REED was in favor of the increase as to but one, and asked for a division of the question.
Mr. MIERS said this bill would require the clerk of his county to do the work for $1,122.50. He was not willing to reduce the salaries as low as this bill requires. He was in favor of a reduction in a reasonable ratio. The bill makes the salary too low. Fifteen hundred dollars is nearer right, and he was in favor of the amendment.
The pending amendment was withdrawn, and Mr. Miers immediately, renewed it.
Mr. MITCHELL did not wish to cut down fees and salaries too low, neither was he willing to bankrupt the people. He was opposed to the amendment, and in favor of the $1,000.
MR. DAILEY stood ready to vote for a reasonable reduction, but was in favor of the amendment. If there is any distinction in these affairs it ought to be in favor of the clerk. He would cast his vote towards equalizing the compensation of county officers.
Mr. VANPELT knew that the officers in his county could hardly pay their deputies under the provisions of this bill, and he was, therefore, opposed to it.
Mr. CALDWELL thought the salaries fixed in the bill were entirely too low. He was willing to a reasonable reduction, but would be compelled to vote against the bill.
Mr. JOHNSON was satisfied that most of the members here were pledged to a reduction of fees and salaries. He was in favor of the men elected to office doing the work themselves. He was opposed to the amendment.
Mr. HOPKINS should oppose the bill, because in his county the work could not be done for the money.
Mr. SAINT thought that high salaries lead to corruption in getting these offices. He favored the passage of the bill because the salaries provided were ample. This bill is just what citizens are demanding at the hands of this Legislature, He should oppose this amendment.
Mr. HEROD: The effort to relieve the dear people is not so heartfelt as it appears. The bill shows upon its face that so far as being friendly to the people it is in that particular a mere farce. The clerk of Marion county could not carry on his office for less than $1,500 or $1,600. If you want honest officers, pay honest wages. If you want to reduce these salaries, why don't you begin with your highest officials--the governor. The amount in the bill was too small. He wanted the fair thing done by all these county officials.
Mr. MARSH did not think it required any very great ability to discharge the duties of any of the county-offices. There are women in the country who could fill these offices for one-half the money. He was satisfied with the fees in this bill--all but the auditor, and thought the auditor should receive about $1,200.
Mr. OSBORNE, of Elkhart, did not intend to say any more upon this subject, and should
not, but to correct figures made by gentlemen who preceded him, It seemed to him that
the fact of the presence in this city of so many county officers should spur members
to do their duty in this matter, and not allow their
The amendment to make the treasurer's salary $1,500 was rejected by--yeas 45, nays 47.
The amendment to increase the auditor's salary to $1,500 was adopted--yeas 59, nays 34.
Mr. WORKS offered an amendment, which was adopted, to reduce the salaries $25 for each 100 voters less than 2,500 population.
Mr. HEROD offered an amendment that the second proviso of the first section apply to sheriff as well as clerks, which was taken by consent. The first section was also amended so as not to interfere with fees due to which clerks and sheriff are now entitled.
Mr. WILLARD moved to amend the third section by appropriately inserting the words "except clerks and sheriffs." He offered the amendment based on the decision made by the supreme court on the ground of its unconstitutionality.
Mr. OVERMEYER called attention to a section of the fee and salary bill of 1871. The only difference between this bill and the law of 1871 was that the law of 1871 states what should be done with the surplus, if any there was, and this bil does not. The decision did not go t0 the proviso only, but that these officers should pay any of their fees, or any part thereof, into the treasury was unconstitutional. Before he could support any such a measure as this he would want to know whether the fees allowed in this bill would relieve the people any more than the present law. He had no doubt about the unconstitutionality of the law, and therefore was opposed to it.
Mr. OSBORNE, of Elkhart, thought the amendment should be rejected.
Mr. MARSH thought the Legislature has the power to enact a fee and salary bill, or both, and he saw nothing in the decision of the Supreme Court to the contrary.
Mr. Willard's amendment was rejected--yeas 21, nays 72.
Mr. HESS offered an amendment which would strike out the words "paid before" and insert "due and payable after" the act was done or services rendered.
Mr. SHANKS said he would not support this bill if any citizen shall have to pay in advance for the privilege of obtaining justice in the courts. It is the honest, people that need the protection of common justice.
Mr. TAYLOR of Daviess was opposed to the bill. Anything which looks like a tax upon justice should not be entertained for a moment. This bill he could not and would not support. It is not one that the people desire or demand, but he would like to see a bill passed that would reduce the present fees and. salaries.
The House then adjourned.
Prayer by the senator from Monroe [Mr. Treat].
On motion of Mr. FOSTER, his bill [S. 184] to prevent the sending out of the State claims for debt against Indianians, to be collected by proceedings in attachment in courts outside of the State, was read the second time.
Mr. HARRIS favored the bill as far as the question of wages is concerned, but its provisions were too broad. He moved it be postponed till 2 o'clock to give time for further examination.
Mr. COMSTOCK regarded the purpose of the bill to punish the intent, and that was made clear.
The motion to postpone was agreed to.
This being Wednesday, the rules make bills on the third reading the special order.
The bill [S. 31--Mr. Grubbs' described fully in these reports of Feb. 11, p. m.] was read the third time.
Mr. TRAYLOR: It is the duty of legislators to enact laws demanding what is right, and prohibiting what is wrong, but this bill reverses that just rule.
The people are not asking the passage of a bill containing all the vicious features of the old bankrupt law without any beneficial feature. This bill allows a party to make all the preparations he desires, and then go into bankrupt cy if he wishes to. It is so constructed that within six months the insolvent may be discharged from all his liabilities. He pointed out objections and showed the workings of several provisions. Honest poor men never take benefit of the bankrupt law; and he boldly asserted that 99 out of every 100 who have taken benefit of the bankrupt law were rich men. It has been said that most any wealthy man can take the benefit of the bankrupt law and die rich. It is wrong to enact a law that will offer inducements for rich men to do wrong. The adoption of such a bill would show that we have sympathy for one man but no sympathy for hundreds who would be injured by it: By every principle of right and justice it is wrong for the Legislature to say a man can pay debts without paying them. The principle is wrong and preposterous ; and he hoped this Legislature will not pass such a bill as the one under consideration.
Mr. MENZIES asked if people of Indiana, within six months after Congress has repealed a voluntary bankrupt law, have made any demand for such a law. In the southern portion of the State the repeal of the bankrupt law met with universal assent. This bill goes farther than the late national bankrupt law, which was exclusively in the interest of the debtor class. Whenever the bankrupt got all things fixed and ready, he was allowed to spring the trap, and if the creditor got 20 cents on the dollar, it was a large divide. If this bill passes, the title ought to be "an act to re-enact the voluntary bankrupt law." It would pile up costs for sheriffs and courts, and eat up estates. It would be a vicious thing to enact such a law. It would be bad for the commercial interests of the State, because it would inaugurate distrust and misgivings in commercial circles.
Mr. HEFRON--As its opponents seem desirous to inaugurate discussion on this bill, the friends of it should say something in its favor. No objection is made to anything in it but the discharge feature. It is true there was an almost universal demand for the repeal of the late bankrupt act, not because a bankrupt law was not needed, but because the expense and injustice done to creditors made it odious. But this bill does not propose to re-enact such a law. Where is the expensive machinery connected with this bill? The purpose of this bill is to enable any man who wants to deal fairly and honestly with his creditors to surrender everything he has in the shape of property, and let it be distributed fairly and honestly among his creditors. And, then, why object to old claims being wiped out? Why hold old claims over him, under the burden of which he can have no hope for the future in this life? This bill is for the benefit of men of enterprise and energy, the men who want to build up and improve the wealth of the country.
Mr. COMSTOCK: There is a demand on the
Mr. BURRELL: The bankrupt law, recently repealed, operated in favor of rich scoundrals; and this would be re-enacting the old bankrupt law in principle; it would be putting in the hands of dishonest men the power to rob honest men. The honest man never violates law. No honest man ever took advantage of the bankrupt act; for no honest man needs to. Then again, another objection to this bill is it would bring about the feeling of distrust, which was so prevalent under the late bankrupt law. It would disturb commercial relations, and is a dangerous principle to inculcate in a law. This bill would be more infamous in its workings than was the old bankrupt law.
Mr. OLDS: Where men in business fall, usually their creditors are largely composed of those who have but a few hundreds of dollars surplus money. The larger creditors usually have their claims secured. This bill ought not to pass, because it is virtually reenacting the same old bankrupt act so recently repealed by Congress, which in nine cases out of ten was taken advantage of by scoundrels, rather than honest men.
Mr. FOSTER entered his solemn protest against the passage of this measure, being satisfied the people, if they had a chance, would vote it down almost unanimously. He was not in favor of legislating in favor of scoundrels and shysters, and therefore hoped the bill would not pass.
Mr. STREIGHT insisted the bill is wrong in principle. What is most wanted now is the encouragement of commercial integrity, which has fallen so rapidly in the past few years, principally because it is so difficult to collect claims. Can we get back to the old high standard of commercial honor by enacting into a law such a bill as this? Certainly not. On the contrary, the best thing the State can do is to enforce honest, contracts. By leaving settlement to the debtor and creditor alone, where the debtor shows an honest hand, he is usually released on just principles. Nine tenths of all bankrupt cases under the old law were actuated by dishonest purposes. At first he thought the discharge feature was the worst in this bill, and on more close examination he found it bad all through.
Mr. GRUBBS denied that this bill was for the benefit of dishonest men; on the contrary, it is for the benefit of the honest as against the dishonest man. To take advantage of this bill the dishonest man will have to resort to more subterfuge than under the late National bankrupt act. Why is it not right that a man in some contingencies should have a discharge from his indebtedness? If a man acts dishonestly he can not secure a discharge under this bill. It is guarded in every possible way, for the purpose of protecting creditors and preventing any dishonest man from securing a discharge, if the courts do their duty, and the creditors who don't want the man discharged do their duty.
The bill failed to pass--yeas 9, nays 35--and a motion to reconsider was laid on the table by yeas 26, nays 19.
The bill [S. 18--Mr. Wood's] to declare Erie canal patents and certified copies thereof evidence of title, was read the third time, and passed by yeas 42, nays 0.
Mr. WOOLLEN, from the
The report of the
The bill [S. 37--Mr. Wier's] to enable county commissioners to dispose of orders and allowences uncalled for for a period of five years or more, was read the third time, and passed the Senate by yeas 43, nays 2.
Mr. Wier, explaining its object, is to prevent old orders uncalled for from being drawn by unauthorized parties.
The LIEUTENANT-GOVERNOR announced the special order for this hour being the bill S. 184, [Mr. Foster's considered the first thine this morning] which was amended as proposed by the author and ordered engrossed.
The bill, [S. 56--Mr. Kahlo's] also a special order for this hour, to amend sections 175 and 176 of the general practice act, in reference to proceedings in attachment, was read the second time and referred to a special committee of three--Messrs. Hefron, Kahlo and Grubbs.
The bill, [S. 43--Mr. Kahlo's] to exempt the wages of laborers from garnisheement for 30 days was read the third time.
Mr. URMSTON considered the present laws sufficient and this bill unnecessary.
Mr. HEFRON favored its passage.
The bill passed the Senate by yeas 38, nays 3.
The bill, [S. 47--Mr. Wier's] to amend section 12 of the reclamation of the swamp land act of March 9,1875, was read the third time and passed by yeas 36, nays 1.
The bill [S. 119--Mr. Kahlo's] abolishing the Superior Court in Cass county, being read the third time--
Mr. BURRELL had been informed that the passage of the bill would amount to a denial of justice to the people of Cass county, the court docket being behind 886 cases, and the bill should not prevail because favored by one or two of their representatives.
Mr. KAHLO was carrying out the pledges he made in the nominating convention--the resolutions of which were read by the clerk. The bill as it now stands is in accord with the wishes of almost the entire county.
Mr. KENT knew the bar of White county and leading citizens there are opposed to this bill, and understood that the people of Carroll county, almost to a man, are also opposed to it,as being a practical denial of justice. He did not object to abolishing the superior court in Cass county, but only to the portion of this bill that affects other counties.
The bill passed the Senate by yeas 38, nays 6.
Mr. MAJOR, explaining his negative vote: I have no objection to abolishing the superior court of Cass county, according to the resolutions of its conventions, which are my sentiments; but they don't go to the extent of attaching Pulaski county to White and Carroll counties; therefore,I vote "no."
The bill [S. 180--Mr. Burrell's], to amend sec. 12 of the divorce law by striking therefrom. the proviso authorizing publication in daily papers of notice to non-resident defendants, was read the third time and passed by--yeas 35. nays 4.
Mr. BRISCOE introduced a bill [S. 424] fixing the fees, salaries and compensation of
officers therein named [State and county], which, on his motion, was referred to the
The Senate adjourned.
Prayer by Representative Snoddy.
The reading of the minutes were dispensed with.
Mr. JOHNSON offered a resolution that no member shall occupy more than 10 minutes in discussion or explanation--which, under the rules lies over one day.
Mr. HUMPHREY introduced a bill [H. R. 605] for the relief of the sureties of Jefferson Ollifant, defaulting trustee of Center township, Green county.
Mr. OSBORNE, of Elkhart, offered additional amendments to the bill [H. R. 113] to regulate fees and salaries. He offered these amendments in consonant with the feelings of the friends of the bill, as expressed yesterday in debate.
The amendments were adopted.
Mr. HESS wanted to vote upon the amendments separately so that he could vote intelligently.
Mr. HUBBARD and Mr. SHANKS wanted the bill with the amendments printed.
The SPEAKER said the bill could be explained in five minutes and the expense of printing would be thereby avoided.
Mr. ALLEN of Putnam, moved to recommend the bill to the
Mr. WILLARD reminded the House that he was placed at the head of the
Mr. BRIGGS made an ineffectual motion to lay the motion on the table.
The motion to recommit, [Mr. Allen's], was rejected.
Mr. OVERMEYER thought we ought to have a direct vote so as to determine whether the House wanted a fee bill or a salary bill, and he therefore moved that the enacting clause be stricken out, and demand ed the yeas and nays thereon.
Mr. SHANKS was in favor of salaries and not fees, and he was opposed to this bill.
Mr. BRIGGS did not think this bill would ever furnish a fund out of which to pay the officer. He also was opposed to it.
Mr. REED deemed this the most important question to come before this Legislature. The difference here manifested between lawyers as to the constitutionality of this bill, would indicate that the judges of the courts might also disagree, and the result might be the same as with the law of 1871.
Mr. OSBORNE, of Elkhart,admitted the disagreement among attorneys and said if we wait for an agreement we will never pass a law here. He wanted an expression whether we shall have a fee or salary law.
The motion to strike out the enacting clause was agreed to by yeas 57, nays 35, as follows:
Yeas--Messrs. Alden, Allen, Bearss,Block1ey, Briggs, Brown of Jasper, Brown of Steuben, Bryant, Caldwell, Campbell, Carey, Compton, Confer,Connaway, Connor, Cunningham, Dalton, Davidson, Davis, Drake, Drover, Faucher, Faulkner, Flodder, Galbraith, Garroutte, Golden, Handy, Harland, Hart, Herod, Hopkins, Hosmer, Humphreys, Kester, Kirkpatrick, Lehman, Messick, Miers, Overmeyer, Owen, Reed, Robeson, Robinson, Rodman, Shanks, Shields, Sleeth, Taylor of Daviess, Taylor of LaGrange, Taylor of Warrick, Thornburg, Vanpelt, Van Valzah, Vawter, Willard, Works--57.
Nays--Messrs. Arnold of Blackford, Arnold of Wabash, Baker, Barker, Carter, Copeland, Daily, Donnell, Edwins, Ginz, Hess, Hubbard, Huthsteiner, Johnson, Kelly, Lindley, Major, March, Mitchell, Nave, Osborn of Elkhart, Osborn of Vermillion, Perry, Rooker, Saint, Scholl, Schweitzer, Shauck, Shutt, Skinner, Snoddy, Stevens, Stucker, Thompson, Watson, Cauthorn.--35
Pending the roll call--
Mr. CONNOR, in explanation of his vote, said: He voted in favor of the motion to strike out the enacting clause because he had voted with 92 members of this House for the fifth proposed constitutional amendment, which in in effect declares that such a bill would be unconstitutional, and he did not want to put another unconstitutional fee and salary law upon the statute book.
Mr. KIRKPATRICK, explaining, when his name was called, said he was satisfied the people wanted a salary bill, but this House had refused to submit the constitutional amendments whereby the General Assembly could pass a law which would be constitutional, and he would vote "aye."
Mr. LINDLEY explaining said he was not in favor of either proposition. He intended to vote for the best measure that, in his judgment, would materially reduce the exorbitant fees of State and county officers. Under the emphatic decision of the supreme court he deemed it imprudent to pass a bill which would be set aside by the courts. He favored a fee and salary law--a salary for all officers except the clerk and sheriff taking great care to guard against constructive fees by the officers named. After the proposed constitutional amendments shall have been duly ratified by the people, then we may proceed to carry out their wishes, and enact a proper salary law. He voted "no."
The vote was then announced as above recorded.
On the motion of Mr. WILLARD, his bill [H. R. 343] was recommitted to the
The bill [S. 131] for the election of a police judge, etc., was read the first time and passed to the second reading.
The bill [S. 30] to authorize guardians to settle the estate of deceased wards was read the third time and passed the House by--yeas 95, nays 0.
The bill [S. 101] to authorize the formation of companies for the construction of water works in and for incorporated cities, etc., was read the third time.
Mr. ALLEN of Putnam said that if this bill became a law it would relieve cities and towns of about half of the expenses they are now at for the supply of water alone.
Mr. SLEETH felt very sure the bill ought to pass, as it would relieve cities from. the control of monopolies to a great extent.
The bill passed the House--yeas 94, nays 0.
The bill [S. 125] for the punishment of persons in possession of stolen property, etc., was. read the third time.
Mr. SAINT said it seemed to him it would be better to have the person who had stolen the goods sent back to the State where the goods were stolen.
Mr. DAILEY said that under the present
Mr THAYER wanted to know what would be the effect in case a man is tried in this State and acquitted for want of evidence, and then goes back where he stole the property ? What would protect the people, then, when the criminal shall plead the protection afforded by the constitution having stood one trial, therefore he can not be tried again for the same offense.
Mr. MIERS was opposed to the bill, for the reason that this State can not go into another State and compel witnesses to come here and testify in these courts.
Mr FAULKNER was decidedly opposed to the bill, as the county would have to bear the expense of the prosecution.
Mr. VANPELT also opposed the bill for the reason that it would be difficult to get witness.
Mr. SLEETH moved to recommit the bill to the
The motion was agreed to.
The bill [S. 268] to fix the time of holding courts in the Second Judicial circuit, was read the third time and passed the House by yeas 90, nays 3.
The bill [S. 58] concerning prisoners in jail was read the third time and passed the House by yeas 90, nays 5.
Mr. LEHMAN'S bill [H. R. 76] to amend the justices act of June 9,1852, was read the third time, the bill provides for but one change of of venue in civil cases.
Mr. THOMPSON said if it shuts off a change of venue from the township, he was opposed to the bill.
Mr. WORKS thought it wrong to cut off the right to a change of venue. He thought the bill wrong.
Mr. BRIGGS: The bill gives the right for but one change of venue for any case prescribed by law. As the law now is, a change may be taken 10 times. He asked, and obtained, consent of the House to insert the words: "for any one cause provided by statutes."
Mr. SAINT had never known of a case to be carried from one justice to another, and he was opposed to any further limitation.
The House failed to pass the bill for want of a constitutional majority--
Yeas 47, nays 43.
Then came the recess till 2 o'clock p. m.
On motion by Mr. OVERMEYER the General Appropriation bill was made the special order for 10 o'clock to-morrow.
Mr. Herod's bill, [H. R. 96] for the inspection of petroleum was read the third time.
Mr. HEROD said this bill raised the standard of oil from 100 to 110 degrees, and also changes the test.
Mr. WORKS said the change of test was objectionable as it allows a lighted match to be passed over the fluid at a distance not less than 1/4 of an inch, or it may be passed over at distance of 10 feet.
By consent the bill was amended so as to read "not more than a 1/4 of an inch."
Mr. REED thought the law as it now stands was in the interest of the people, and he was opposed to this bill.
Mr. DRAKE thought this bill was in the interest of the dealer and not as good as the old law.
The bill failed to pass the House--yeas 35, nays 54.
Mr. Allen's, of Putnam, bill [H. R. 122] to authorize cities and towns to negotiate and sell bonds, for the purchase of ground and erection of school buildings, etc , was read the third time, and passed the House by yeas 77,nays 13.
Mr. Briggs' bill [H. R. 133] fixing the time at which causes shall stand for trial in the circuit court at the first term, after it shall have begun, when 10 days' notice or publication has been made for 30 days before the first day of the term.
Mr. OVERMEYER saw no good reason set forth to change the law. It seemed to him the present law was better than the bill now before the House,
Mr SHANKS hoped the bill would pass.
Mr. SLEETH thought the law ought to stand as it is. The law as it stands presents a large amount of litigation. The bill was wrong, because it discriminates between citizens and corporations. It is no fair race, and he was opposed to this bill.
Mr. SAINT: To repeal this law would be unjust discrimination. A National bank having a note upon the same individual that the private citizen has, can go into the United States courts and get a judgment much sooner than the private citizens can in the State courts. He was opposed to the passage of this bill.
Mr. BRIGGS: Under the present law, suit can be brought at anytime during court so long as 10 days' notice has been given. He offered the bill to get rid of an unnecessary expense in his county. He thought the bill ought to pass.
Mr. TAYLOR of Daviess had waited for some time for some gentleman to tell why this law should be repealed. He spoke in opposition to the bill, and in favor of the people, because the law, as it is now, was more to their interest. He held that this bill would favor national banks and foreign corporations over citizens of our own State. He hoped the bill would not be passed, as it was in opposition to rights of the citizen.
Mr. MARCH said two years' experience with the present law has demonstrated the fact that it interferes with the business of the courts and encourages litigation; consequently he hoped the bill would pass.
Mr. SLEETH: There were 100 men in court now under the operations of the present law, and by the passage of this bill you would throw them out; and who is going to pay the cost? He was opposed to the form of the bill? and the principles embodied in it.
The bill failed to pass the House by yeas 42, nays 54.
Mr. Kirkpatrick's bill [H. R. 210] to regulate weights and measures, was read the first time. It only changes the weight, of corn on the cob, making it 70 instead of 68 pounds.
Mr. JOHNSON hoped the bill would not pass, because 68 pounds of corn on the cob will overrun a bushel, or 56 pounds, when shelled.
Mr. THAYER said in nine cases out of 10 a bushel of corn on the cob will not hold out. After corn has become dry and uniform, so much in weight will make a bushel. This bill was to make the weight uniform. He hoped the bill would pass, so that it may conform to the weights of other States.
The bill failed to pass the House by yeas 40, nays 51.
Mr. Compton's bill [H. R. 271] to authorize street car companies to use streets, highways, etc.--if street railways are extended outside of the city or town must obtain consent from county commissioners--was read the third time and finally passed the House yeas 85, nays 4.
The
Mr. Orborne's of Elkhart, bill [H. R. 496] concerning decedents' estates--it abolishes administrator and allows the heirs to file a bond to pay the debt, and thereby avoid the expense of an administrator--was read the third time and passed by yeas 88, nays 2.
Mr. Shield's bill [H. R. 12] to legalize the corporation of Seymour, Jackson county, was read the third time and passed the House yeas 90,nays 2.
Mr. Sleeth's bill [H. R. 132] to amend the act prescribing the duty of administrators--letters of administrators must be granted first to the widow and second, next nearest of kin--was read the third time and passed the House--yeas 89,nays 2.
Mr. Gordon's bill [H. R. 88] to repeal the act defining vagrancies, etc., was read the third time and passed the House by--yeas 81, nays 11.
Mr. Arnold of Blackford's bill [H. R. 455] to transfer the title of the State of Indiana to the Antietam National cemetery, was read the third time and passed the House--yeas 89, nays 1.
Mr. Osborne of Elkhart's bill [H. R. 497] to amend section 466 of the general practice act, was read the third time and passed the House without opposition.
The
The report was concurred in and the Home then adjourned.
Prayer by Eld. M. Broyles, of the Baptist church.
On motion by Mr. LEEPER his bill [S. 338--described in these Reports of Feb. 4] for the protection of game and birds was read the second time.
Mr. WIER moved to amend the bill by providing that the trapping of wood duck for the purposes of propagation shall be permitted. There is a species of duck that inhabit the territory between Lakes Erie and Michigan called the "wood duck," which is transported for the use of Eastern Parks. The duck is abundant in that section, are migratory in character, and the object of the amendment is to give opportunity for transportation with a view to propagating the species.
Mr. TRUSLER opposed opening the door for the trapping of any species of game, because the trapper can not keep other fowls out of his trap.
Mr. LEEPER also opposed the amendment, regarding it as striking at the vital principle of the bill. This bill has been indorsed by the shooting club of South Bend, composed of some 200 members, and is desired by many in his section of the country.
Mr. TREAT was satisfied the amendment is not attacking the bill in spirit, though probably unnecessary.
The amendment was rejected.
On motion by Mr. BRISCOE the bill was amended so as to make it unlawful to shoot or kill wild turkey between February 1 and November 1.
Mr. TRUSLER regarded this bill as an improvement on the present law, and hoped to see it passed, though it was not as stringent as he could desire.
Mr. TREAT moved ineffectually to amend by making it unlawful to destroy squirrels during the months of February, March and April in each year.
On motion by Mr. LEEPER, the constitutional restriction requiring that "every bill shall be read by sections, on three several days in each House," was dispensed with--yeas 42, nays 2--and the bill and amendments were considered as engrossed, and bill was read the third time, under the operations of the previous question demanded by Mr. Leeper.
Mr. URMSTON deprecated the practice of amending the game law at almost every session of the General Assembly. He believed the present statute was sufficiently strict on this subject.
Mr. LEEPER insisted that his bill proposed vital and much needed changes from the present law; which law in his section of the State could not be enforced.
The bill was passed the Senate--yeas 43, nays 3--under the operations of the previous question, again demanded by Mr. Leeper.
On motion by Mr. SHIRK, his bill [S. 69] to provide for the organization and support of an asylum for feeble minded children--near Knightstown--under the direction of three Trustees to be appointed by the governor, was read the second time.
On motion by Mr. MENZIES his bill [S. 140] authorizing the surrender of city charters on petition of two-thirds adult tax-payers where the population is less than 7,000, was read the second time--Mr. M. explaining it was simply to get rid of the large expense incident to the maintenance of a munuicipal government; and was well guarded.
Mr. HEFRON pointed out the difference between the bill and the present law, showing that while two-thirds of the tax-payers may surrender the charter one day, the very next a majority may obtain a renewal of the charter. He opposed the passage of the bill.
On motion of Mr. MENZIES the constitutional restriction requiring all bills to be read on three separate days was dispensed with by yeas 44, nays 0. The bill and amendments were considered as engrossed, the bill read the third time, and finally passed the Senate by yeas 46, nays 1.
On motion by Mr. VEIHE this bill [S. 254], for the payment of judges [per diem $8 and
eight cents per mile] holding courts out of their circuits was read the second time, the
constitutional restriction dispensed with by yeas 46, nays 0, the bill considered as
engross-[ed]
On motion of Mr. COMSTOCK his witness bill [S. 184--described in these reports of Januuary 20] was taken up and read the second time.
Mr. COMSTOCK explained the object of the bill to be only one change in the act, viz.: authorizing husband and wife to testify for or against one another. It proposes to place an honest man and an honest woman on the same footing in the courts with disreputable characters as to their competency to testify on the witness stand. There are countless wrongs, the very quintessence of cruelty, sometimes, known only frequently as between husband and wife, and the ends of justice would be advanced frequently by allowing each to testify.
Mr. HEFRON opposed any innovation upon this well established principle in law, which only operates where the husband or wife are interested in the result of the matter under investigation. The bill would give an undue advantage, an opportunity for husband and wife to collude as against another. The power of coercion the husband possesses over the wife would certainly be productive of wrongs innumerable under this bill, while the wrongs perpetrated under the present law are very rare indeed.
Then came the recess till 2 o'clock.
A number of reports were submitted from standing committees, where, under a custom tolerated this session by consent, were placed on the files without reading.
Mr. HARRIS believed the only way to get at justice and truth is to let everybody testify, so he was not opposed to that provision in the bill under consideration, but he objected to the exception made therein, and he proposed an amendment to do away with his.
Mr. MENZIES could not see why this bill ought not to pass, inasmuch as the Senate has already passed a bill removing all legal disabilities from married women, and as the law now permits the most debased criminal to go upon the witness stand, there is no good reason why the married woman should have her lips sealed when placed in the witness box under the last restriction. He favored the bill.
Mr. URMSTON--Although the criminal is allowed to testify in his own behalf. The experience of every attorney has proven that provision has operated more against than for the defendant. He opposed this bill and amendment as going a step too far. We should abstain as far as possible from interfering with the domestic affairs of families.
Mr. WOOD: The bill recently passed by the Senate having separated husband and wife in their relations as to property, he should favor the bill, although another new departure.
Mr. HEFRON was afraid this bill would open up a way and means for advantage to the prosecution by allowing an additional witness for the plaintiff. He regarded it as against public policy to enact such a measure as the one proposed in this bill.
Mr. HARRIS cited cases where the woman's character can not be cleared without her testimony in her own behalf.
Mr. STREIGHT opposed the amendment. What could a bad woman and a willing husband not do under such a measure as now proposed? They could rob men of property in many instances and undr many circumstances.
The amendment was rejected by yeas 18, nays 27.
Mr. DICE proposed an amendment so that when suits are brought by or against administrators, etc., and there is any testimony with regard to conversation or transaction the administrator, guardian or executor may also testify as to the same.
It was agreed to.
Mr. FOWLER thought this bill would be a dangerous innovation upon the present practice. It is utterly impracticable. He moved to strike out the enacting clause.
Mr. KENT was opposed to this bill, and thinking this the quickest way to get rid of it would vote for the amendment.
The amendment was rejected by--yeas 11, nays 35.
The bill was ordered engrossed.
The LIEUTENANT GOVERNOR announced the special order being the bil [S. 17--Mr. Kent's, described in these reports of February 10] to enable the owner to drain and reclaim wet lands.
Mr. GARRIGUS said: More than one-half of the State is vitally interested in this bill. There was now three laws governing the drainage of lands, and the one under consideration is an addition to the individual drainage law of 1875, and a substitute for the law of 1873 and l877. It is absolutely necessary that a large portion of the State should have the benefit of a good drainage law. He explained the provisions of this bill at length, and urged its passage.
Mr. KENT answered legal objections heretofore raised against this bill when it was discussed in the Senate. The report of the committee, embracing a substitute bill, was concurred in.
Mr. WILSON made an ineffectual motion--yeas 2, nays 37--to lay the bill on the table.
Mr. KRAMER moved, to amend by requiring "three" instead of "one" person to make the application to the board of commissioners.
It was agreed to on a division--affirmative 18, negative 17.
Mr. Kent declaring that that amendment would destroy the efficiency of the bill, and, if adhered to, his interest in the bill was at an end, desired some one voting with the majority to move a reconsideration of the vote just taken.
On motion by Mr. DURHAM, the vote was reconsidered--yeas 31, nays 12.
Mr. BURRELL moved that the amendment be rejected, and, on that motion, demanded the previous question, which was seconded by yeas 35, nays 7--and, under its operation, the amendment was rejected by--yeas 28, nays 15.
Mr. STREIGHT offered an amendment, by which he hoped to cut off any stock-jobbing.
It was rejected.
On motion by Mr. KRAMER the bill was further amended in section 1, by requiring notices to be posted 10 days prior to the session of the board, and any person whose land is affected may contest the utility of making the ditch, and if the board be satisfied of its public utility it shall appoint three disinterested free-holders--one a surveyor--to assess benefits, etc.
On motion by Mr. LANGDON, section 1 of the bill was further amended by appropriately inserting the words "one who is the owner of at least a free-hold interest on the land affected," etc.
The bill was ordered engrossed by yeas 22, nays l7.
On motion by Mr. FOSTER his bill [S. 184] to prevent the practice of sending out of the State claims against Indianians for debt to be collected by proceedings in attachment, was read the third time, and passed by yeas 38, nays 0.
Mr. Hefron introduced a bill, by request, [S. 425] for the redistriction and buying
out of wards in cities of not less than 9,000, nor more than 13,000 inhabitants by the
census of 1870, under commissioners appointed by the governor, which was read the
first time and referred to the
The Senate adjourned.
The reading of the clerk's minutes was dispensed with,
The SPEAKER, laid before the House an itemized statement of accounts of the Northern
prison for the year ending October 31, 1878, which was read and referred to the
Also, a communication from the governor in relation to Federal affairs, which was
referred to
Mr. OSBORNE, of Elkhart, bill, [H. R. 252] defining adultery and fornication, was read the third time. Nearly all the governments of the world, except the State of Indiana, have a statute punishing such a crime. He wanted members to go upon the record whether they are willing longer that our statute shall be silent upon this subject.
Mr. MIERS was in favor of the first section and thought the punishment should be more severe.
Mr. HUBBARD supported this bill most heartily, and he believed he would be willing to make the penalty more severe.
The bill failed to pass the House--yeas 49, nays 39--for want of the constitutional majority of 51 votes.
The bill, [S. 131] to provide for the election of a police judge in cities having a
voting population of l6,000 was read the second time and referred to the
The bill, [S. 6--see Senate proceedings of Feb. 3] to legalize the acknowledgment of deeds by notaries public after the expiration of their commission, was read the third time and passed the House by yeas 82, nays 3.
The House resolved in a committee of the whole [Mr. Edwins in the chair] for the
consideration of the general appropriation [H. R. 592] but immediately rose and reported
progress, that the bill might be read a second time. The bill having been read, the
House again resolved into a
Mr. LINDLEY moved to amend by reducing the salary of the governor's private secretary from $2,000 to $1,000.
Mr. TULLEY moved to amend the amendment by making the salary $1,500.
Mr. OVERMEYER did not think the salary of the governor's private secretary ought to be reduced, but the governor's clerk might be dispensed with entirely,
Mr. OWEN was in favor of reducing the number of employes, and paying well the men who do the work.
Mr. THAYER said you could not change the governor's salary during his term, but you could cut off his clerk and secretary, and he thought the governor's salary was enough for him to pay his own clerk and secretary.
Mr. HUMPHREY said the executive was the least expensive of the departments, and that the governor could not perform the duties of his office without a clerk.
Mr. TULLEY thought there were plenty of men able and capable to discharge the duties of private secretary who would be glad to do the work for $1,500.
Mr. Lindley's amendment, as amended, by Mr. Tulley, was agreed to.
On the motion of Mr. LINDLEY, the appropropriation for the governor's clerk was stricken from the bill.
Mr. TULLEY reduce the salary of the governor's clerk to $350 per year, which was agreed to.
Mr. DRAKE moved an amendment to increase the pay to the adjutant general to $1,500.
Mr. SHANKS proposed to amend by making it $2,000, which was accepted by Mr. Drake.
Mr. SHANKS supported the amendment in a short speech.
Mr. Speaker CAUTHORN showed that the perquisites of the adjutant general, for postage expenses, and assistants, raised his pay to $1,586 25.
Mr. WORKS thought the compensation of their officers ought to be increased.
Mr. TAYLOR, of Davies, moved to amend the amendment so as to make the salary $1,250, which was agreed to.
The amendment as amended was agreed to.
Mr. LINDLEY moved to amend so that the salary of the deputy's secretary of the State shall be $1,000, which was agreed to.
On the motion of Mr. WORKS, the secretary of States clerks' salary was reduced to $800.
Mr. BRIGGS moved an amendment to the auditor's salary, making it S1,500 instead of $2,500.
The amendment was agreed to.
Mr. LINDLEY moved to amend by striking out "$3,000" for deputy and clerk hire of the auditor, and insert, "$2,000," in lieu.
On the motion of Mr. OVERMEYER the committee arose, reported progress and asked leave to set again at 2 o'clock p. m.
The report of the committee was concurred in, and the House then took a recess until 2 o'clock p.m.
Mr. CARTER introduced a bill [H. R. 609] to authorize appeals from county commissioners in cases of location or removal of county seats.
On the motion of Mr. Lindley the House again resolved itself into a committee of the whole [Mr. Shanks in the chair] on the general appropriation bill.
Mr. LINDLEY made an ineffectual motion to strike out the auditor's clerk in the insurance and land department.
Mr. WORKS offered an amendment to reduce the salary of these clerks to $1,000 each.
Mr. LINDLEY desired further to amend so as to make but one clerk, which the committee rejected.
The amendment [Mr. Work's] was then agreed to.
Mr. TULLEY moved an amendment to reduce the janitor's salary for State officers from $1,200 to $800.
Mr. OVERMEYER moved to further amend so a to strike out all in relation to the janitor, which was agreed to.
The amendment as amended was then agreed to.
Mr. WORKS offered to amend so as to compel the auditor to pay into the State treasury all moneys collected by him under section 3 of the act regulating foreign insurance companies including the 25 per cent. allowed the auditor by said section.
The amendment was agreed to.
Mr. WORKS moved an amendment to reduce the treasurer's clerk to $800, which was rejected.
Mr. BARKER moved to amend so as to allow the watchman of the treasurer $400 instead of $600.
Mr. OWEN did not think we ought to manifest such a willingness to cut down the salaries of Janitors and watchmen. He thought $600 little enough.
Mr. EDWINS moved to amend the amendment so as to make the salary $500.
Mr. LINDLEY was opposed to a reduction in the salary of the watchman.
Mr. WILLARD said that the way the committee was considering this bill pointed to an extra session. If there was any important measure to amend in this bill let it be done, and not waste the time of this House in reducing the pay of some minor offices.
The amendment was rejected, as was also the amendment to the amendment.
Mr. SLEETH and Mr. TULLEY saw no need to allow the attorney general a clerk. He was receiving a very large amount of fees, and he makes more money than most of the State officers.
The salary for the attorney's clerk was struck out on motion by Mr. OWEN.
Mr. WORKS moved to amend the item for the salary of the superintendent of public instruction, by reducing it to "$2,000" from $2,500.
Mr. MARCH and Mr. HUBBARD were opposed to any reduction in the salary of the superintendent of public instruction.
Mr. MIERS thought the State that had the largest school fund of any State in the Union did not want to put at the head of her school system an incompetent man to manage that important branch of the State Government, and was opposed to a reduction of the salary.
Mr. BRIGGS was in favor of appropriating just what the law allows and no more. He thought $2,000 was enough.
The amendment was agreed to.
Mr. EDWINS moved to amend by allowing the superintendent of public instruction's clerk $1,000.
Mr. ALLEN of Putnam moved to amend the amendment so as to make it read $1,500, which was agreed to,
The amendment as amended was also agreed to.
Mr. LINDLEY moved to amend by adding to that appropriation for traveling expenses, or so much thereof as may be necessary, which was agreed to.
Mr. COPELAND moved to strike out all that relates to the salary of the assistant librarian, citing the law that the librarian should not be allowed an assistant.
Mr. OVERMEYER, moved to strike out the janitor of the supreme court, which was agreed to.
Mr. OVERMEYER moved an amendment, which was agreed to, that no judge shall receive extra pay, except his necessary expenses, not including per diem.
Mr. BARKER moved to reduce the salary of State geologist from $2,000 to $1,500, which was agreed to.
Mr. TAYLOR, of Davis, moved to strike all expense for geological survery, and all appropriation for the use of the board in connection with the State fair, which was adopted--affirmative 32, negative 31--on a division of the committee.
Mr. SKINNER moved to strike out all that relates to appropriations to the Horticultural society. It was rejected.
Mr. WORKS moved to amend by reducing the salary of the superintendent of the Hospital for the Insane from $1,700 to $1,200, which was agreed to.
Mr. WORKS moved to further amend by reducing the salary of the superintendent of the blind from $1,400 to $800, which was agreed to.
On motion by Mr. Hubbard the salary of the three trustees for the Soldiers' Orphans' Home was reduced from $300 to $120 each.
Mr. REED moved to strike out the fixed salaries of the faculty of the State University, and allow the University board to fix the salaries of their faculty out of the monies appropriated to the University. It was rejected.
Mr. FANCHER moved an amendment providing that no amount of the $3,000 appropriated therefor, be expended for or improving said normal School institution, until the city of Terre Haute shall place a like amount in the hands of the trustees for the same purpose.
Mr. VAN VALZAH proposed an amendment to the amendment making the appropriation to the State Normal School $4,000 instead of $3,000, which was rejected.
The amendment [Mr. Fancher's] was agreed to.
Mr. OVERMEYER moved to amend farther by adding "which sum hereby appropriated shall include and be in lieu of all sums appropriated by the act of March 5,1873, except that provided by section 4 of said act. The amendment was adopted.
Mr. HUBBARD moved to strike out all pertaining to the Purdue University, which was rejected.
Mr. Miers moved to amend by making the appropriation for Purdue University $9,000 viz: for agriculture, $2,000; for mechanics, $1,000; for horticulture, $1,000; for philosophical apparatus, $1,000; for periodicals and library, $1,000; for current expenses, $2,000, and fixtures and supplies, $1,000.
The amendment was supported by Messrs. Miers, Baker, Herod, Reed, Mitchell and Johnson, and opposed by Mr. Sleeth and Mr. Handy.
The amendment [Mr. Miers'] was rejected.
On motion by Mr. Miers, $2,000 was appropriated for the school of agriculture of Purdue University.
On the motion of Mr. Overmeyer, three janitors were allowed the State building, with a salary of $500 each.
Mr. Connor moved an amendment to add for the expenses of the office of superintendent of public instruction $500, which was adopted.
Mr. Overmeyer moved to amend by striking out the proviso to the last clause of section 2, and inserting that all sums paid out for office expenses for any officer of State should be paid. on bills of account for expenses actually incurred and approved by the governor, who shall report in detail all such expenses and the items thereof to the next General Assembly, which was agreed to.
The committee then rose and reported the amendments to the House. The report was concurred in by the House of Representatives.
Mr. OVERMEYER moved that the constitutional rule requiring that "every bill shall be read by sections on three several days in each House, be dispensed with; that the bill and amendments be considered as engrossed; the bill read the third time now and put on its passage.
A constitutional provision requiring the yeas and nays, they were ordered, and being taken, resulted yeas 0, nays--80. The motion was rejected, two-thirds of the House not deeming it expedient to dispense with the constitutional restriction.
On motion the general appropriation bill [H. R. 592] was ordered engrossed for the third reading.
And then the House adjourned.
The reading of the minutes were commenced when on motion by Mr. FOWLER the further reading was dispensed with.
On motion by Mr. SHIRK his bill [S. 69] for the establishment of a home for feeble minded children, was taken up; and committee amendments with regard to Board of Trustees, were read and concurred in.
Mr. SHIRK explained: The bill makes provision for the care of such children as are not capable of being educated in the common way. Over 1,000 children and adults of weak minds or idiotic are now scattered all over the State, of which at least 400 are between the ages of 5 and 14. These have been a burden to society, and a burden which hangs with heavy weight on parents so unfortunately afflicted. Success has attended institutions of this character in Ohio, Kentucky, Pennsylvania, Massachusetts, Illinois, Iowa and New York, which latter State has two such. The success of these institutions everywhere has far exceeded the most sanguine expectations of their friends. Where there is feebleness of mind there is most always some weakness in the physical system, hence extraordinary means should be used for their improvement, which can not be properly resorted to in the ordinary routine of life. The buildings now used for the soldiers' orphan home, would answer the purposes of such an institution with a little improvement, and would accommodate all of this class who are apt to apply for admission for several years to come, so is will not require any great expense to start this institution, it being intended to supersede the one now at Knightstown; the necessity for the keeping up of which has almost expired. The bill proposes to place the new institution under the same officials now managing the Soldiers' Orphans' Home. He proceeded to explain its other features, and in conclusion moved to dispense with the constitutional restriction, consider the bill engrossed, and press it to the final vote now.
Mr. FOWLER seconded the motion in a short speech.
Mr. BURRELL resisted this motion, desiring time to examine the features of the bill.
Mr. WINTERBOTHAM regarded this as a very important bill, but as highly improper the disposition manifested to hurry it through the Senate. Its object is a worthy one, but the bill should be considered carefully.
Mr. WOOLLEN feared defeat unless the bill were advanced as rapidly as possible; and for that reason should favor the motion.
Mr. FOWLER insisted this asylum should be established at once; was willing the bill should be perfected, but objected to delay.
Mr. KRAMER moved to amend by a proviso that the question of admitting children shall be determined by the Board of County Commissioners, under rules adopted by the board of the institution.
Messrs. SHIRK, FOWLER and TRUSLER opposed the amendment.
On motion of Mr. LEEPER the bill was amended so as to exclude from the benefits of the institution all over 21 years of age.
Mr. BURRELL moved to amend so that none shall be admitted except upon a proper adjudication of sanity by two justices of the peace, a physician and the clerk of the court.
Mr. SHIRK opposed the amendment. The amendment was rejected.
Mr. KRAMER made an ineffectual motion; to strike out "State" and insert "county" in lieu, in section 7.
Mr. MENZ1ES moved to amend by restricting the inmates to the children of poor and indigent parents.
Mr. SHIRK was not willing to exclude children of parents able to support them, the object of the institution being to develop their physical and mental characters. The bill provides that parents who are able shall contribute to the support of their children in the institution.
Mr. FOWLER opposed the amendment.
It was rejected.
Mr. BURRELL moved ineffectually to strike the word "State" from section 7.
The bill was ordered engrossed.
On motion by Mr. TRAYLOR, his bill [S. 216], defining embezzlement, was read the
second time with a committee substitute, which was
On motion by Mr. DAVIS, his bill [S. 382], concerning aid to railroads--described in these reports February 12 was read the third time, several committee amendments concurred in, the bill considered as engrossed and finally passed the Senate by--yeas 35, nays 1.
On motion by Mr. LANGDON his bill [S. 118] concerning appointment of receivers, was read the second time, the constitutional restriction dispensed with by yeas 38, nays 0.
The bill considered as engrossed, read the third time and finally passed the Senate by yeas 37, nays 0.
Mr. POINDEXTER introduced a bill [S. 426] to amend section a of acts concerning organization of voluntary associations, so as to prevent their making any distinction on account of nativity, complexion or religion, or political belief in the dispensation of charity.
Mr. BURRELL introduced a bill [S. 427] to amend sections 1 and 2 of the act to regulate public warehouses, approved March 9, 1875, by striking from section 1 the words "for one year thereafter," so as to keep the record for future use; and amending section 2 so that more than one building or room may be used under a single permit.
They were read the first time and referred to appropriate committees.
Then came the recess till 2 o'clock.
The LIEUTANANT GOVERNOR announced the special order being the bill [S. 195--Mr. Viehe's] providing for the redemption of real properly sold on execution, and for deeds of conveyance in such cases, was read the second time, together with a substitute for the same reported by committee.
Mr. GRUBBS stated: The substitute was drawn by the senator from Marshall [Mr. Reeve], and that it would be nothing more than an act of justice to the author that its consideration should be postponed till that senator shall be present.
On motion by Mr. VIEHE these bills were postponed till Monday next at 2 o'clock p. m., and made the special order for that hour.
On motion by Mr. TRUSLER the bill [S. 187] amending the present law, so as to abolish the freehold qualifications required for supervisors of highways, and striking out all that relates to the taxing of acres of land for road purposes, was read the third time.
Mr. FOWLER explained: It changes the election of supervisors from October to April, in addition to the changes above referred to.
The bill finally passed the Senate by--yeas 39, nays 0.
On motion by Mr. GRUBB5 his bill [S. 65] defining libel, was read the second time. the constitutional restriction dispensed with, by--yeas 40, nays 0,and the bill pressed to the third reading and passage, by--yeas 41, nays 0.
On motion by Mr. STREIGHT his bill [S. 196] regulating tolls charged on plank or gravel roads, located in roadbeds ceded by the United States to the State of Indiana, with a committee report recommending amendments.
Mr. STREIGHT said it had reference only to such roads as were originally built by the Government, and ceded to the State--really affecting only the road known as the Cumberland road. By the provisions of this bill such roads may collect, only enough to pay a dividend of 10 per cent., the surplussage to be expended in repairs on the roads.
The report was concurred in.
On motion by Mr. HEILMAN, the bill [S. 209] to provide for appeals from boards of county commissioners was read the second time--the constitutional restriction dispensed with by yeas 40, nays 0-- the bill considered as engrossed, and finally passed the Senate by yeas 36. nays 0.
On motion by Mr. LANGDON, his bill [S. 353] requiring all trustees to be bona fide residents of the State was read the second time, the constitutional restrictions dispensed with--yeas 38, nays 0--the bill considered as engrossed, read the third time, and finally passed the Senate by--yeas 39, nays 0.
On motion by Mr. WOOLLEN the bill [S. 179--described in these reports January 20] to establish a State Board of Health, was read the second time.
Mr. WOOLLEN, being exceeding anxious for the passage of this bill, moved it be made the special order for 2 o'clock to-morrow.
Tho motion was agreed to.
On motion by Mr. HART, the Booneville town trustee legalizing act [H. R. 141], was read the second time; the constitutional rule suspended by-yeas 39, nays 0--the bill considered as engrossed, read the third time, and finally passedby--yeas 36 nay 3.
On motion by Mr. TARLTON his bill [S. 331] to amend section 1 of the act of March 3, '77, authorizing city or town trustees to turn surplus school revenue with the payment of indebtedness for school buildings, was read the second time, and under a dispensation of constitutional restriction, pressed to the third reading, and passed by yeas 36, nays 0.
Mr. TARLTON explaining the only provision of the bill was to make it imperative upon trustees to pay over any surplus of the special school fund, to be used in the payment of the board debt of the city or town, credited in the erection of school buildings, etc.
On motion by Mr. WOOD the committee amendments to the bill [S. 39] relative to the changing of proposed lines and termini of railroads, were concurred in, the bill read the second time, the constitutional restrictions despensed with by yeas 38, nays 1, the bill considered as engrossed, read the third time and passed the Senate by yeas 38, nays 1.
On motion by Mr. FOWLER the bill [S. 365] to amend sec. 3 and repeal sec. 4 of the act of March 10, 1873, for relief of the Lye Creek Drainage Association, was read the second time, the constitutional restriction dispensed with by yeas 39, nay 1,the bill considered as engrossed, read the third time and passed the Senate by yeas 32, nays 5.
Mr. FOWLER, explaining the only change proposed by this bill, was to make the word "may" in section three read "shall."
On motion by Mr. SARNIGHAHSEN his bill [S. 175] for the appointment of county superintendents by the Board of Township Trustees.
Mr. SARNIGHAUSEN said this bill passed the Senate two years ago, but the House of
Representatives took no action on it. It is a good bill, and will, should it become a
law, elevate the standard of our common schools. Senators will please bear in mind
that this bill does not define the duties or fix the salary of the county
superintendent. He believed the opposition to this office arose from wrong selections
that have been made--men have been placed in these positions without knowledge or
experience, who were more anxious to enjoy their lives than to fulfill their official
duties. He knew of what he spoke. This bill, if it should become a law, will remove to
a great extent the present opposition to the office of county superintendent, because
under this bill the township trustees will be almost compelled to select competent
men. No costs or expense will be made by this bill as the fees for examination must be
paid by the applicants to the treasurer of the board, and the treasurer of the board,
turns over this money
Mr. DICE said there was a feeling in his portion of the State against this office. He moved the bill be recommitted with a recommendation that the committee so amend the bill as to abolish the office of county superintendent. There are bills pending before the Senate for the abolishment of that office, and that would be one of the best pieces of legislation that could be enacted. The office way no good for the educational interests of the State. The Senate should say now that it is in favor of abolishing this costly office. The schools are no better now than under the old examiner system, yet a greater expense is involved. This bill proposes to elevate this office and make it an additional expense to the county, while the people all over the State are crying for its abolishment. The cause of education has not been advanced by any legislation had for the past five or six years; and this bill being in the same direction, ought not to be passed.
Mr. KENT: If this office is left in existence the officer should be examined by the State board. But he was opposed to continuing the office. As a general thing, these positions are held by comparatively ignorant men, trying to exercise more power than the czar of all the Russins.
Mr. SARIGHAUSEN insisted the opposition is not so much against the law as against the persons who have been selected for the positions. The senator from Fountain (Mr. Dice) speaks of the expense of this bill; but it proposes not one cent of expense except such as is paid by the applicants for examination. We have made our school system sucessful; it is regarded as one of the best in any of the States, and to abolish this office would be a step backward.
Mr. WOOLLEN would be compelled to vote for the abolish merit of this office. Nearly every one in his district demands the abolishment of the office on account of its expensiveness.
Mr. RILEY thought the superintendent should be subject to a very strict examination.
Mr. FOWLER regarded it unwise to abolish this office. It should be elevated, and that is the object of this bill. There has been more dissatisfaction grown up because a large number of its incumbents are not qualified for its duties than from anything else. in his section the people are not demanding the abolishment of this office. Until something better be devised, it would be bad legislation to abolish this office.
Mr. URMSTON insisted we have no use for such an officer as a county superintendent.
Mr. HART believed if there is any one office complained of in his end of the State, it is that of county superintendent and its expensiveness.
Mr. SARNIGHAUSEN knew of no complaint made in the Northern part of the State as as against the office of county superintendent.
The motion to recommit was rejected by yeas 12, nays 26.
Mr. Menzies believed the greatest complaint comes of the inefficiency of the incumbents of the office of county superintendent, and believing the system should be tried with increased facilities for the advancement of the position, he should vote in favor of the bill.
On motion by Mr. SARNIGHAUSEN the bill was ordered engrossed.
And then the Senate adjourned.
The reading of the journal was suspended, on the motion of Mr. Allen, of Putnam.
The SPEAKER said there was a great responsibility resting upon the House now; that his table was loaded down with business, and he would stay in his chair as long as a quorum, would remain with him, until the business was disposed of.
The
Mr. MARCH moved to amend by inserting before the word "interest" the word "illegal." The amendment was agreed to.
Mr. WATSON moved to amend by striking out of the first section all that relates to usurious interest and inserting in lieu that "no greater rate of interest shall be taken unless by agreement in writing and not to exceed a greater rate than 8 per cent." He said that 6 per cent. was incorporated into the bill without regard to the monetary condition of the country and against, the public sentiment of a large portion of the people. The rate being so low and the penalty so severe the law would not be regarded. The tendency of the law, if regarded, would be to create a cont action of the currency in the State, because the surrounding States, and even New York and Massachusetts provided for a higher rate of interest. He would support the bill if 8 percent. instead of 6 was put in it.
On the motion of Mr. MIERS the amendment was laid on the table.
Mr. MIERS moved that the bill be considered as engrossed and put upon its passage, which was agreed to.
The bill was then read the third time.
Mr. SLEETH insisted that the features of this bill destroyed the credit of commercial law. The bill would have the tendency to drive capital out of the State.
Mr. Briggs said that a 6 per cent, law without a provision to forbid a larger rate of interest would be useless. He was in favor of a six percent. law, and wanted to see it enforced. All parties demanded a six per cent. law in their platforms last year, on which we were elected, and the people expect and demand it. Let us see if any member here will vote against the law with provisions that are intended to enforce it and prevent it from being a dead letter.
Mr. MARCH: As it is conceded, on all hands, that there must be legislation upon the
subject, it may not be improper to suggest that any law fixing a rate of interest is a
clear departure from the principle of free trade in money, even though intended only to
provide a rate where none is agreed upon. In fixing a rate of interest, we are to
consider the purchasing power of money, the supply and demand at this time and for some
years to come. Six per cent. would be a fair average rate. To allow a higher rate upon
special contract nullifies any good effect that might otherwise be derived from the law.
It would afford no protection to the needy or visionary borrower against the greedy and
wary lender, as between these two classes the highest rate would rule. A higher special
rate gives an advantage to the dealer in money over all other pursuits. He always makes
a special contract, and can exact the highest rate. In the course of business the
laborer, producer, mechanic and manufacturer advance their products on a credit before
receiving any interest, and when they contract for interest they are compelled to
ac-[cept]
As to injuring commercial proper, if the law is obeyed, it will not injure any one. On the contrary it will promote stability and regularity in business, and restore confidence. Those who set the law at defiance ought to suffer.
Mr. ALLEN of Putnam, demanded the previous question, and under the operations thereof the bill passed the House by yeas 78, nays 18, as follows:
Those voting in the affirmative were:
Messrs. Alden, Allen. Baker, Barker, Bearss, Blockley, Briggs, Brown of Jasper, Bryant, Caldwell, Campbell, Carey, Carter, Compton, Confer, Connor, Cunningham, Dailey, Dalton, Davidson, Davis, Drake, Drover, Edwins, English, Faulkner, Flodder, Galbraith, Garroutte, Ginz, Golden, Handy, Hart, Hosmer, Hubbard, Humphreys, Johnston, Kelley, Kester, Lehman, Lindley, Major, March, Messick, Miers, Mitchell, Overmeyer, Owen, Perry, Richeldafer, Rodman, Rooker, Saint, Scholl, Schweitzer, Shanks, Shauck, Shields, Shutt, Snoddy, Stevens, Stucker, Taylor of Daviess, Taylor of LaGrange, Taylor of Warrick, Thayer, Thompson, Thornburg, Tulley, Vanpelt, Van Valzah, Willard, Wimmer, Works, Speaker Cauthorn, H. S.--78.
Those voting in the negative were:
Messrs. Arnold of Blackford, Arnold of Wabash, Brown of Steuben, Connoway, Donnell, Fancher, Harland, Herod, Hopkins, Kirkpatrick, Nave, Reed, Robeson, Robinson, Skinner, Sleeth, Vawter, Watson--18.
Pending the roll call--
Mr. CAMPBELL, when his name was called, explaining, said he was in favor of a six per cent, interest law, but wanted to allow parties to contract for eight per cent. He voted "aye."
Mr. CONNER, in explanation of his vote, said the House re fused to allow him to offer an amendment to a very bad feature of the bill, but being in favor of a lower rate of interest on contract than 10 per cent.,and believing the Senate would so amend the bill, he voted "aye."
Mr. ENGLISH, when his name was called, said he voted in accordance with instructions from the convention that nominated him. He voted "aye."
Mr. RANCHER, in explanation, said it was a serious question whether this would not be detrimental to the hard working, enterprising men of our State, who have mortgaged their homes to improve the country, by depriving them of the privilege of removing their mortgages when they become due, and in consequence suffer foreclosure and lose their homes. The law-makers should not lose sight of this class and favor a class who are continually clamoring for a reduction of interest, so as to enable them to loan money. He voted "no."
Mr. HOPKINS explaining, said he believed the bill was in opposition to the best interests of the people of the State; he therefore voted "no."
Mr. REED, in explanation of his vote, said he was heartily in favor of a lower rate of interest than the present, and in favor of a penalty for usury. He would like to vote for some of the provisions of tins bill nd against others. It contains objectionable features which should not be incorporated into the law, and believing such a law detrimental to the best interests of the people of the State, he voted "no."
Mr. SNODDY, when his name was called, said he believed the passage of the bill in its present form was ruinous, but hoping the Senate would correct it, he voted "aye."
Mr. TAYLOR of Daviess, when his name was called, in explanation said he voted for this bill because he had promised to do so, but believed, it odious and objectionable. He voted "aye."
Mr. VAWTER, in explanation of his vote. when his name was called, said, with the gentleman from Daviess [Mr. Taylor] he believed the bill unjust and odious, bit he voted "no."
The vote was then announced as above recorded.
The commitee on benevolent institutions returned the bill [H. R. 112] to provide for the election of trustees for the benevolent institutions, with amendments, and when so amended that the bill do pass.
Mr. OVERMEYER, made an ineffectual motion--yeas 36, nays 34--that the bill and report lie on the table, and that 150 copies be printed.
On the motion of Mr. WILLARD the report was concurred in by yeas 51, nays 27.
Mr. OVERMEYER moved to amend the first section by adding that the provisions of this act shall not apply to present incumbents; stating it was evident that this was solely a political measure.
Mr. LEHMAN moved to lay the amendment on the table, which was agreed to by--yeas 52 nays 35.
Mr. WILLARD moved that the bill be considered as engrossed and put upon its passage, which was agreed to by--yeas 54, nays 37.
The bill then passed the House by yeas 56, nays 34, as follows:
Those voting in the affirmative were:
Messrs. Alden, Allen, Baker, Barker, Briggs, Brown of Jasper, Bryant, Caldwell, Compton, Confer, Cunningham, Dally, Dalton, Davidson, Davis, Drake, Drover, Edwins, English, Faulkner, Flodder, Galbraith, Garoutte, Ginz, Handy, Hart, Hosmer, Humphreys, Huthsteiner, Johnson, Kester, Lehman, Major, Miers, Mitchell, Nave, Perry, Reicheldafer, Rooker, Saint, Scholl, Schweitzer, Shauck, Shields, Shutt, Stucker, Taylor of Daviess, Taylor of Warrick, Thompson, Tulley, Vanpelt, Van Valzah, Willard, Wimmer, Works, Speaker Cauthorn, H. S.--56.
Those voting in the negative were:
Mesars. Arnold of Blackford, Arnold of Wabash, Bearrs, Brown of Steuben, Campbell, Cary, Carter, Conway, Conner, Donnell, Fancher, Golden, Harland, Herod, Hopkins,Kelly, Kirkpatrick, Lindley, Messick, Overmeyer, Owen, Reed, Rodman, Robinson, Shanks, Skinner, Sleeth, Snoddy, Stevens, Taylor of Lagrange, Thayer, Thornburg, Vawter, Watson--34.
Mr. Faulkner's bill [H. R. 38] amending the act concerning trespassing animals, was read the third time and passed by yeas 78, nays 5.
On the motion of Mr. HUMPHREYS the general appropriation bill [H. R. 592] was read the third time, and passed the House by--yeas 77, nays 15.
Mr. March's bill [H. R. 59] providing for appeals from boards of county commissioners, was read the third time, and passed the House by--yeas 77, nays 0.
Mr. Taylor of Daviess' bill [H. R. 56] defining the tenth and twelfth judicial circuit, was read the third time, and passed the House by--yeas 81, nays 1.
Mr. English's bill [H. R. 24] regulating indebtedness of counties having a voting population of over 20,000 was read the third time, and passed the house by--yeas 72, nays 0.
Mr. Blackley's bill [H. R. 187] defining the meaning of the first proviso of the second section of an act providing for the selection of county seats, and for the erection of county buildings, passed the House by yeas 74, nays 0.
Mr. Sleeth's bill [H. R. 131] to amend sec. 77 of the general practice act was read the third time.
Then came the recess till 2 o'clock.
Mr. Sleeth's bill H. R. 131 was passed the House--yeas 57, nays 25.
On the motion of Mr. WILLARD the House took up the special order, being the consideration of the bill [H. R. 295] in relation to a Metropolitan police, returned from the select committee thereon with a favorable majority and a minority report proposing amendments so as to make the police equally divided politically.
Mr. ENGLISH was physically unable to discuss the merits of the amendments submitted by the majority of the special committee. Under the provisions of the bill there would be no expense to the State, as it would be borne by the city, and but very little, if any, more to the city than under the present law. The object of the bill was to remove, so far as possible, the influence of polities from the police matters. The present system was but a reward every year or two to the ward politician, from bad to good, and back again. It assumes the character of reward for political services.
Mr. LINDLEY: If there is a necessity for a metropolitan police in Indianapolis, why is it not necessary for other cities? He said he could not see why the representatives from Marion county were not asking for the passage of this bill. He saw no reason why Indianapolis should have such a law.
Mr. WILLARD made an ineffectual motion--yeas 45, nays 45--to lay the minority report upon the table.
Mr CONNER wished to call attention to the fact that there was no one here asking for such a law--not even the party in the majority.
Mr. HEROD: Not a man, so far as he knew, except those who was expecting appointments. was asking for such a law as this. He denied the imputation that the police were made up of rewards of favorites in ward politics. He cited the fact that the credit of the city of Indianapolis was as good as the National Government as evinced by the low rate of interest on which the city had recently borrowed money. He was as anxious as any one to take the police out of the dirty pool of politics. It was by the most rigid economy to day that the city was able to keep within the limit of the tax levy allowed by law. He understood this was a political measure, and he appealed to the House to stand by the city of Indianapolis and see fair play, and let the tax-payers control their own affairs.
Mr. SAlNT said after consideration he thought for cities the size of Indianapolis the bill would be a good thing, and for that reason he should vote for it.
Mr. ENGLISH said that under this bill he did not think it could be shown that it would increase the expense one dollar.
The amendment proposed by the minority to strike out "45,000" and insert "20,000" in lieu was rejected by--yeas 39, nays 55.
The second amendment of the minority that the governor appoint one commissioner from each political party was also rejected by--yeas 41, nays 53.
The report of the majority was then concurred in by yeas 51, nays 43.
Pending the call--
Mr. SAINT, when his name was called, in explanation, said: Under a Federal law now in force every town and city in the United States can have, upon application, any number of so-called Federal supervisors, to be used in intimidating voters, who do not support the administration of this country, and he was willing to vote for any bill that, will counteract in some degree the partisan supervision of elections in this country, and that will tend to give both parties an equal chance, and therefore be in the interest of peace and good order.
So the majority report was concurred in.
Mr. ENGLISH moved that the bill be considered engrossed, read a third time and put upon its passage.
Mr. HEROD made an ineffeceual motion to recommit the bill. The bill was read the third time, and passed the House by yeas 53,nays 39--as follows:
Those voting in the affirmative were--
Messrs. Alden, Allen, Baker, Barker, Blockley, Briggs, Brown of Jasper, Bryant, Caldwell, Compton, Confer, Cunningham, Dailey, Dalton, Davidson, Davis, Drake, Drover, Edwins, English, Faulkner, Flodder, Galbraith, Garroutte, Ginz, Handy, Hart, Hosmer, Humphreys, Huthsteiner, Johnston, Kester, Lehman, Miers, Mitchell, Nave, Perry, Reicheldafer, Rooker, Saint, Scholl, Schwitzer, Shields, Shutt, Stucker, Taylor of Daviess, Taylor of Warrick, Thompson, Tulley, Van Pelt, Van Valzah, Willard, Works--53.
Those voting in the negative were--
Messrs. Arnold of Blackford, Arnold of Wabash, Bearss, Brown of Steuben, Campbell, Carey, Carter, Connoway, Connor, Donnell, Fancher, Golden, Harland, Herod, Hopkins, Hubbard, Kelly, Kirkpatrick, Lindley, Major, March, Messick, Overmeyer, Robeson, Rodman, Robinson, Shanks, Shauck, Skinner, Sleeth, Snoddy, Stevens, Taylor of Lagrange, Thayer, Thornburg, Vawter,Watson, Wimmer, Speaker Cauthorn, H S.--39.
Pending the roll call--
Mr. FAULKNER, in explanation of his vote, said, under a pledge to vote for a metropolitan police bill, made to a friend last fall, who had his watch stolen in this city, he voted "aye."
Mr. KESTER, in explanation of his vote, when his name was called, said it seemed to him that this was a stretch or power, and he hoped that it would not be abused. He conceded that the evil so long felt of intimidation of voters had not been remedied, and hoping that this might work a reform in that direction, he voted "aye."
The vote was then announced as above recorded.
Mr. WILLARD, from the
Mr. WILLARD said it reduced the fees from 25 to 33 per cent., endeavored to cutout all constructive fees, and to call the special attention of the grand juries to any attempted violation. He explained its provisions separately, showing the difference between the law of 1875, in force, and the bill in his hand.
On the motion of Mr. MIERS, the bill was made the special order for next Tuesday, at 10 o'clock.
Mr. MIERS offered a resolution, which was adopted, discharging the clerk of the
Mr. Baker's bill, [H. R. 390] to legalize each person elected at the April elections, was read the third time and passed the House by yeas 69, nays 6.
Mr. Huthsteiner's bill,[H. R. 303] to legalize the acts of the board of trustees of Tell City, in Perry county, was read the third time and passed the House by yeas 72. nays 1.
Mr. Shutt's bill,[H. R. 231] to legalize the acts of the board of the incorporate town of Auburn, DeKalb county, was read the third time and passed the House by yeas 80, nays 3.
Mr. DAILY offered a resolution, which was adopted, that the House adjourn at 11:30 to-morrow, and the auditor of State be authorized to fire a salute of 38 guns at 12 o'clock in honor of Washington's birth day.
The House then adjourned.
The session was opened with prayer by Professor A. B. BENTON, of Butler University.
On motion of Mr. HARRIS the reading of the minutes were dispensed with.
The following described bills for acts were introduced, read the first time, and severally referred to appropriate committees:
By Mr. SARNIGHAUSEN, [S. 428] to provide for the appointment of guardians, the management of wards, estates, and the settlement of decedents' estates, prescribing the rights, liabilities of officers connected with the management thereof, and the heirs thereto; which, on his motion, was referred to a select committee, viz., Messrs. Viehe, Wilson and Kent, without reading.
By Mr. COMSTOCK, [S. 429] to legalize the elections held in 1878 in the town of Washington, Wayne Co , and the sets of the Board of Trustees of said town.
By Mr. WOOD, by request, [S. 430] for an amendment to the game law, so as to prevent the taking of fish in any manner in the months of February, November and April of each year.
By Mr. SMITH, [S. 431] to amend sec. 79 of the general city incorporation repeal law of March 14, 1867--concerning the formation of new wards--on petition of 30 or more resident free-holders it shall be determined by a vote.
By Mr. FOWLER, [S. 432] to amend sec. 10 of the act amendatory of the act establishing a House of Refuge--may receive infants between the ages of seven and sixteen.
By Mr. POINDEXTER, [S. 433] for an act defining the crime of drunkenness in public,
and also defining the crime of encouraging drunkenness, which on his motion was
referred without reading to the
By Mr. KAHLO, by request [S. 431] to provide for the examination and appointment of licensed surveyors--the governor to appoint three State commissioners to examine applicants.
By Mr. GARRIGUS, [S. 435] to amend section 17 of the fee and salary act of March 12, 1875, concerning legal advertising (except delinquent tax list); per square 250 ems, 60 cents; additional square, 30 cents.
By Mr. GARRIGUS, [S. 436] to amend section 5 of the supplementary act to the common school law of March 8,1873, with reference to printing the delinquent tax list, to cost not exceeding 30 cents per tract or description of land.
By Mr. OLDS, [S. 437] to amend section 455 of the general practice act of June 18, 1852, so as to allow a re-appraisement on ten day's no- tice.
By Mr. STREIGHT, [S. 438] to amend the fee and salary act, of March 12, 1875, so as to reduce all fees and salaries 30 per cent.
On motion by Mr. STREIGHT his bill [S. 196] regulating the tolls charged on plank or gravel roads located in road-beds deeded to the State of Indiana by the United States [the Cumberland road] was taken up and read the second time.
Mr. STREIGHT, by request, explained its provisions at greater length than set forth in these reports of yesterday.
Mr. COMSTOCK regarded this bill as proposing an unjust discrimination between turnpike, gravel and other road companies.
Mr. STREIGHT replied to objections. On his motion the bill was ordered engrossed on a division of the House--affirmative 21, negaative 9.
On motion of Mr. KENT his bill [S. 197] to protect the ballot box, to procure a fair election, and to prevent the sale and barter of votes, was read the second time.
Mr. KENT explained that this bill is intended to amend the present law so as to punish the man who sells his vote by fine and disfranchisement, which would do more to protect elections than any other provisions of the law. Those selling votes being mostly poor men, he would not punish them by imprisonment, but by fine and disfranchisement.
On his further motion the constitutional restriction was dispensed with, the bill
considered as engrossed, read the third time and
On motion by Mr. COMSTOCK his bill [S. 271] enlarging the jurisdiction of mayors and justices of the peace was read the second time.
Mr. COMSTOCK--The purpose of the bill is to economise time and money in the prosecution of petty offenses, by authorizing mayors of cities and justices of the peace to commit the defendant at once to the work-house, instead of getting his living at the public expense. He moved to dispense with the court's restriction, that the bill may be pressed to its final passage now.
Mr. OLDS doubted the propriety of passing this bill. It gives justices of the peace too much power. Their jurisdiction, now, is too large--many of their decisions are a mockery on justice because of their limited knowledge of law.
Mr. HARRIS was not familiar with the details of prosecutions in minor offences, but this bill seemed to be proposing a correct measure The average jurymen are not lawyers, but when the facts are set before them they have a pretty just sense of right, and are very apt to come to a fair judgment.
Mr. WOOD--It is decreed by very high authority that man shall earn his living by the sweat of his brow; and that being the point in this bill, he favored its passage.
Mr. URMSTON was favorably impressed with this bill; not seeing how it can work any hardship to the defendant; and it certainly would be a great saving to the State.
Mr. OLDS--In a great many instances the weight of the interest, of the justice of the peace is turned against the defendant, in order that the officer may secure his lees; and if the defendant be poor and unfortunate he is at me mercy of the prosecution to send him to the workhouse, and make a record against him. that will cling to him as long as he lives.
Mr. DICE was not sure but the bill was all right, but it may not be proper to hasten its passage by a suspension of the rules. The motion to dispense with the constitutional restriction was rejected by yeas 30, nays 8, for want of a constitutional majority of two-thirds to set aside the constitutional provision.
The bill was ordered engrossed for the third reading.
On motion by Mr. HARRIS his bill [S. 59] authorizing the construction of work houses by the county commissioners, was taken up, read by title only, and ordered engrossed for the third reading.
On motion by Mr. COFFEY, the House amendments to the bill [S. 277] fixing the legal uniform rates of interest at six per cent., were read.
On motion by Mr. MENZIES, the bill and amendments were referred tea select, committee of five, which the LIEUTENANT GOVERNOR subsequently made to consist of Messrs. Menzies, Coffey, Trusler, Cadwallader and Foster.
On motion by Mr. GRUBBS the bill [H. R. 187] putting a legal constitution on the first sec. of the law providing for re-location of county seats, was read the first time.
On motion by Mr. BURRELL the constitutional rule was dispensed with yeas 36, nays 2--the bill read the second time, and passed to the third reading on to-morrow.
On motion by Mr. OLDS his bill [S. 269] to amend section 1 of the act of March 14, l877, amendatory of section 561 of the general practice act of June 18, 1852, was read the second time and ordered engrossed.
On motion by Mr. CADWALLADER his bill [S. 198] concerning the sounding of railroad locomotive whistles at crossings of public highways, was read the second and third times, under a dispensation--yeas 36, nays 1--of the constitutional restriction, and passed the Senate by yeas 34. nays 0.
On motion by Mr. VIEHE the bill [H. R. 56]
defining the 12th and 10th judicial circuits was read the first time and referred to
the
On motion by Mr. MOORE the bill, [H. R. 158] in relation to settlements by county commissioners with county, township or school officers, not to be binding when the officer is delinquent, was read the second time.
Mr. BURRELL moved to strike out section 2, because that section proposes to go back and, unsettle the rule of practice which has prevailed up to this time, that a settlement is conclusive. It is a dangerous principle to make a man liable now for things he was not liable for at the time of settlement.
Mr. MOORE: If that amendment prevails, it will destroy the point desired to be made in the bill. There can be no hardships in a bill of this kind, for a party who has actually put money in his pocket wrongfully should be compelled to make it up. The provisions of this bill are intended to apply to cases in Grant and in Fayette counties.
Mr. BURRELL insisted that this section was dangerous, and that it was unsafe to go back and unsettle settled principles of law.
The amendment was rejected.
Then came the recess till 2 o'clock.
On motion of Mr. BURRELL, the bill [H. R. 112] to provide for the appointment of trustees of the benevolent institutions of the State--by the governor, with the advice and consent of the Senate--was read the first time and referred to the committee on benevolent institutions.
Mr. MENZIES, from the special committee to which was referred the bill [S. 277] regulating the legal rate of interest, reported the same back with a recommendation that the Senate do not concur in the House amendments, and recommending that a conference committee of the two Houses be appointed thereon.
The report was concurred in.
Mr. MENZIES offered a resolution, which was adopted, authorizing a
On motion by Mr. KRAMER, his bill [S. 308] to fix the rate [20 cents per description] for annual publication of delinquent tax list, was read the second time.
Mr. WILSON moved to amend by reducing the penalty for delinquent taxes from "ten" to "five" per cent., and striking out "six" per cent. on delinquent taxes and inserting "five" in lieu.
Mr. HARRIS--It is difficult enough now for the treasurers to collect, taxes. The amendment would be an additional invitation to men not to pay their taxes. The penalties are now low enough. Legislation should look to encourage the payment of taxes.
Mr. KRAMER said the law is construed differently in different counties. He insisted, 10 per cent. was not too much of a penalty, and where the tax remains delinquent for one year, six per cent. interest should be charged. His experience as a county treasurer showed the necessity for the provisions of this bill. He opposed the pending amendment, and insisted that no impediment should be thrown in the way of collecting taxes.
The amendment was rejected.
The yeas and nays being demanded on a motion to adjourn, the roll call discovered no quorum present, and after some time vainly spent in endeavoring to bring in the absentees--
The Senate adjourned.
The reading of the journal was, on the motion of Mr. FAULKNER, dispensed with.
Mr. Caldwell's bill [H. R. 551] to legalize the purchase of certain grounds by the board of county commissioners of Clinton county, was read the third time, and passed the House by--yeas 68, nays 6.
Mr. March's bill, [H. R. 58] to amend an act declaring attorneys' fees in bills of exchange, notes, etc.. illegal, was read the third time.
Mr. OVERMEYER submitted an amendment, which was taken by consent, providing that this law shall not affect any existing contracts.
Mr. HEROD thought the bill should not pass. He said we ought not to put such sweeping clauses in the laws as this one, which does not allow a man to agree to pay attorneys' fees even if he wants to.
Mr. DRAKE said it would work hardships with widows and orphans in many cases.
Mr. BRIGGS was compelled to vote for the abolishment of the entire matter of collecting attorney fees on contracts of all kinds.
Mr. COPELAND was opposed to the bill because he thought it would work hardships to the middle classes.
The bill then passed the House by--yeas 60, nays 19.
Mr. Vanpelt's bill [H. R. 261] in relation to hedges and fences along high ways, was read the third time and passed the House by--yeas 81, nays 0.
Mr. Reed's bill [H. R. 493] to prevent breeding animals from running at large was read the third time.
Mr. DRAKE thought the passage of the bill would give rise to trouble in neighborhoods.
Mr. CAMPBELL said the passage or this bill would do much towards keeping neighborhoods from getting into squabbles over breechy stock, at least, and he was in favor of its passage.
The bill finally passed the House of Representatives by--yeas 68, nays 13.
The bill [H. R. 453] to amend section two of an act providing for the election and appointment of supervisors of highways was read the third time and passed the House by--yeas 68, nays 13.
Mr. Dailey's bill [H. R. 228], authorizing the correction of the school account of Adams county, was read a third time, and passed the House by yeas 79, nays 0.
Mr. Faulkner's bill [H. R. 5], to amend section 1 of an act regulating the number of grand jurors, was read a third time, and passed the House by yeas 81, nays 2..
Mr. Miers' bill [H. R. 386], to exempt growing crops from sale on execution until the same shall have fully matured, was read the third time, and finally passed the House by yeas 90, nays 0.
Mr. Osborn of Elkhart's bill [H. R. 498], to amend sections 65 and 66 of the decedents estate act, was read the third time, and passed the House by yeas 79, nays 1.
Mr. Works' bill, [H. R. 30] to amend section 8 of an act concerning the alienation of property, was read the third time.
Mr. OVERMEYER and Mr. HEROD did not see any reason to change the present law. The law, as it now stands, when the estate is deeded in common between the husband and wife jointly, does not admit of an execution on the the property for the debt of the husband, and in case of the death of either party the survivor comes into possession of the entire estate.
Mr. WORKS explained: The object of this bill is to make the conveyance to the husband and wife, vest in them the title as tenant in common. The creditors can then reach the property of the husband, and upon his death the wife and children would inherit the property according to the law of decents. A conveyance to husband and wife under the present law places it beyond the reach of the creditors of both husband and wife, and takes the property entirely out of trade.
Mr. BRIGGS thought this law ought to pass, in order to protect the legal heirs and creditors.
Mr. WATSON was opposed to any innovation upon the principles of the old law, and he was opposed to the change proposed in this bill.
The bill then failed to pass the House by--yeas 31, nays 47.
Mr. Humphrey's bill [H. R. 168] to authorize cities and towns to issue bonds--not to exceed the amount of indebtedness--was read the third time and passed the House by--yeas 78, nays 3.
Mr. Golden's bill [H. R. 174] to repeal section two of an act defining certain misdemeanors--it repeals the provoke law--was read the third time and passed the House by--yeas 55, nays 27.
Mr. Taylor, of Daviess' bill [H. R. 444] defining warehouse receipts, was read the third time.
Mr. TAYLOR, explaining the features of the bill, said the bill was in the interest of farmers, producers and manufacturers of distilled, spirits, by enabling those not desiring to dispose of their products to store the same with warehouse men, and taking receipts therefor, which receipts can be used for collaterals or title to the property embraced therein can be transit: ned by assignment of receipt or receipts for the same. The bill would enables small manufacturers of distilled spirits, or persons storing grain or other commodities to realize monies by virtue of said receipts and thereby obviate the necessity of the owners sacrificing their grain, spirits or commodities by being forced to sell on a depressed market.
The bill then passed the House by yeas 66, nays 11.
Mr. Conner's bill [H. R. 84] to encourage the planting and growing of forest trees was read the third time.
Mr. WORKS objected to the bill as being clearly unconstitutional, and he did not think it would be right to exempt property from taxation because of what may be cultivated thereon.
Mr. CONNER: There are four New England and six Western States that have such a law. He had examined the several constitutions of these states, and they were nearly like the constitution of this State, and he did not see that the proposed law conflicts in any way with the constitution.
Mr. STUCKER understood that the bill exempts certain lands from taxation after being set out in forest trees. He was opposed to exempting any species of property from taxation, and in his judgment persons living in cities that owned large lots of land that is very valuable, located in the suburbs, would plant a few trees, and ask that they be exempt from taxation. Why not exempt all orchards in the State? He was opposed to this bill, or any other that will exempt any class of property from taxation.
The bill failed to pass the House by--yeas 19, nays 57,
Mr. Conner's bill [H. R. 179] to prevent the
Mr. WILLARD, in explanation of his negative vote, when his name was called, said it seomed to him that the bill was so carefully worded as to cut out the sale of any foreign fertilizer. He therefore voted "no. '
Mr. OSBORNE, of Elkhart's, bill [H. R. 114] to legalize and make valid certain building and loan associations, was read the third time and failed to pass the House for want of a quorum.
Pending the call, the House took a recess until 2 o'clock p. m.
The bill, [H. R. 179] pending at the time of taking the recess was declared passed the House by yeas 65, nays 2.
On the motion of Mr. MIERS the regular order was suspended and reports from committees were receeived as follows:
Mr. Briggs, from the
Also, the bill, [H. R. 472] fixing the member and defining the jurisdiction of justices of the peace with a recommendation that it lie on the table. Also, the bill, [H. R. 109] to create the 42d judicial circuit, and providing for appointment of Judge and prosecutors with a recommendation for a definite postponement. It was laid on the table.
The following described Senate bills were read the first, time and passed to the second reading:
The bill [S. 184] to prevent the practice of resorting to distant courts to oppress the citizens of Indiana; [S. 254] to provide for the payment of judges holding courts in certain cases; [S. 65] defining libel and to prevent the publication thereof; [S. 187] for the election and appointment of supervisors; [S. 140] to authorize the surrender of city charters, etc ; [S. 209] to authorize appeals from boards of county commissioners; [S. 27] to provide for the government and discipline of the State prisons; [S. 180] to amend the act in relation to divorces; [S. 119] to repeal the act establishing the superior court, in Cass county; [S. 47] to enable owners of wet land to drain the same, etc.; [S. 43] to exempt the wages of laborers from garnishment; [S. 37] to enable the board of commissioners to dispose of uncalled for allowances; [S. 18] to declare all canal patents legal; [S. 382] to amend the first and fourteenth sections of the act authorizing counties and townships to aid in the construction of railroads; [S. 338], for the protection of wild game; [S. 331] to amend the first section of an act authorizing the school trustees of a city or incorporated, town to pay over special school revenue; [S. 216] to amend the act defining embezzlement; [S. 118] to amend the general practice act; [S. 353] concerning trusts and powers; [S. 365] to amend section 3 and repeal section 4 of the draining law.
The bill, H. R.609.
The following described House bills were read the second time by title only, and severally referred to appropriate committees, unless otherwise stated:
The bill, [H. R. 593] to amend an act to authorize aid to the construction of railroads; [H. R. 608] for the relief of the sureties of Jeff Ollitfont, trustee, defaulting; [H. R. 603] to discourage the keeping of useless and sheep killing dogs; [H. R. 602] to repeal an act requiring certain officers to make out statement; [H. R. 601] to prohibit the keeping of intoxicating liquors in sheds, booths, etc.; ordered engrossed.
The bill, [H. R. 609] to establish mileage of members of the General Assembly; [H. R. 600] to amend section 18 of the act regulating descents; H. R. 578] in relation to malfeasance and embezzlement in office; [H. R. 697] to amend the act concerning the advertising of sheriffs sales; [H. R. 594] to amend section 5 of the act to provide for a uniform assessment of property; [H. R. 595]to exempt from tax one dog to each householder; [H. R. 596] to amend an act providing for the organization of county boards; [H. R. 597] to encourage the building of free gravel roads; [H. R. 604] regulating the stopping of pasenger trains; [H. R. 605] to provide for the punishment of false weights; [H. R. 606] to amend section 56 of an act defining misdemeanors.
The following described bills or acts were introduced, read the first time and passed to the second reading:
By Mr. STUCKER, [H. R. 610] to legalize the acts of the board of the town of Paoli, Orange county.
By Mr. STUCKER, [H. R. 611] to prevent township trustees from making expensive medical bills.
By Mr. MARCH, [H. R. 612] supplemental to an act concerning the partition of land.
By Mr. MARCH, [H. R. 613] to amend section 41 and repeal section 43 of an act for the Government of the State University.
By Mr. MARCH, [H. R. 614] to amend section 596 of the general practice act.
By Mr. DALTON, [H. R. 615] to amend section 8 of an act supplemental to an act to provide for the uniform assessment, of property.
By Mr. TAYLOR, of Lagrange, [H. R. 616] to amend sees. 47 and 57 of an act dividing the State into counties.
By Mr. ROBINSON, by request, [H. R. 617] providing for the erection and management of county hospitals.
By Mr. ROBINSON, by request, [H. R. 618] to amend an act to authorize county commissioners to fill vacancies.
By Mr. ROBINSON, [H. R. 619] to regulate the letting of contracts of public Institutions.
Mr. JOHNSON offered a resolution that from and after Monday next at the call of counties each member may have the chance to call up one bill on its third reading.
It lies over for one day under the rules.
By the
By Mr. SHAUCK, [H. R. 621] to legalize the acts of The Council of Kendalville.
By Mr. HUTEISTEIN ER, [H. R. 632] to amend sec. 5 of an act to provide for a uniform assessment of taxes.
By Mr. WATSON, [H. R. 623] to legalize the conveyance of certain real estate.
By Mr. BRYANT, [H. R. 624] to amend sections 103 and 104 of the common school laws.
By Mr. BRIGGS, [H. R. 625] to amend secs. 1 and 2 of an act giving employes a lien for their work upon the corporate property.
By Mr BRIGGS. [H. R. 626] prescribing the manner in which notice for the sale of delinquent taxes shall be made.
By Mr. BRIGGS, [H. R. 627] prescribing the manner of sale of real estate by execution.
By Mr. OSBORN, of Elkhart,by request, [H. R. 628] to establish a board of fish commissioners.
By Mr. MITCHELL, [H. R. 629] to repeal an act to provide for township elections.
By Mr. OWEN, [H. R. 630] regulating the presenting of claims before county commissioners.
By Mr. OWEN, [H. R. 631] to legalize sales of real estate by sheriffs in certain cases.
By Mr. Owen, [H. R. 632] to legalize the acts, of the trustees of Williamsport lodge of F. and., A. M. And then the House adjourned.
The reading of the minutes was dispensed with.
On motion by Mr. KAHLO, his bill [S. 56] to amend sections 175 and l7d of the general practice act, was road the second time, with a substitute reported by the committee, providing that no court in this State shall have jurisdiction in case of attachment, garnisheement, or supplementary proceedings where the plaintiff and principal defendant are both non-residents, and the money sought for is the personal earnings or wages due the principal defendant from any person or corporation doing business in this State. The report was concurred in, and the bill ordered engrossed.
On motion by Mr. SHAFFER, his bill [S. 122] to provide for repairs on free turnpike roads in the several counties of the State, was read the second time and ordered engrossed, after concurrence in the committee amendments.
On motion by Mr. HEILMAN, his bill [S. 325] to amend the charter of the town of Evansville, was read the second time, committee amendments concurred in, and the bill ordered engrossed.
On motion by Mr. HART, his mortgage chattel secreting bill: [S. 169, described in these Reports January 20] was read the second time, with a committee substitute therefor.
Mr. HEFRON introduced the bill to fix a penalty for the violation of a civil contract; which was going a little too far: an innovation upon the practice in this country that ought: not to be allowed.
Mr. HART believed the principle of this bill to be right, in order to prevent frequent losses of mortgaged property, especially in the border counties.
Mr. HARRIS thought the bill was right.
Mr. POINDEXTER referred to his knowledge of cases where the bill would prove a great advantage.
The substitute was adopted, and the bill ordered engrossed for the third reading.
On motion by Mr. SARNIGHAUSEN, his bill [S. 258] to legalize certain acts of the local authorities in the annexation of territory to the city of Fort Wayne, was read the second time and ordered engrossed, after an explanation by Mr. SARNIGHAUSEN.
On motion by Mr. WINTERBOTHAM, the following described House bills were read the
first time and severally referred to appropriate committees: [H. R.5] to amend section
1 of the act regulating grand jurors; [H. R. 38] to amend section 0 of the act
concerning inclosures and trespassing animals; [H. R.
59] providing for appeal from boards of county commissioners in cases of
annexation of territory to cities and towns against the will of the owner; [H. R. 88]
to repeal the vagrancy act; [H. R. 122]
supplemental to the act allowing cities and towns to issue bonds to pay debts
contracted for school purposes, of March 8, 1873; [H. R. 131] to amend section 77 of
the general practice act; [H. R. 132] to amend
the act to provide for issuing of letters testamentory and in relation to decedent's
estates,. approved June 17, 1852; [H. R. 168]
to authorize cities and towns to issue bonds to reduce indebtedness, etc.; [H. R. 174]
for repeal of sec. 2 of the misdeamonor act commonly known as the provoke law; [H. R. 228] to enable the superintendent of public
instruction and auditor of Adams county to correct errors in the school fund; [H. R. 231] to legalize the incorporation and
official acts of the trustees of Auburn, Dekalb county; [H. R. 261] in relation to
fences and hedges along public highways; [H. R. 271] to amend sees. 1, 2, 4 and 5 of
an act authorizing street railroad companies to use public high ways;[H. R. 303] to legalize the acts of board of
trustees of Tell City, Perry county; [H. R. 364] authorizing county sheriffs to
administer oaths in certain cases; [H. R. 455]
to facilitate the transfer to the United States of the title of the Antietam National
cemetery, in the State of Maryland; [H. R. 385] to exempt growing crops from sale on
execution until the same shall have fully matured; [H. R. 390] to legalize the
election of such person who was declared elected to the office of township trustee at
the April election of 1878; [H. R. 592] making general appropriations for the support
of the State Government for the years 1880 and 1881; [H. R. 453] to amend sec. 2 of the super-[visor]
On motion by Mr. FOSTER his bill [S. 103] to authorize cities to construct and maintain water works; issue and sell bonds to pay for said construction; was read the second time, with committee amendments, which were concurred in.
Mr. HARRIS offered an amendment, which was agreed to, excluding Indianapolis from the provisions of the bill.
Mr. MENZIES regarded this as too important a measure to be hurried through without careful consideration: it might destroy vested rights in many towns along the old Wabash and Erie canal, and in other places.
Mr. FOSTER understood the bill to apply to cities which desired to build water works. It is substantially the same bill that has worked well for many years in Ohio.
Mr. BURRELL offered an amendment providing that the bill shall apply only to the city of Fort Wayne and within three miles thereof.
Mr. SARNIGHAUSEN said his bill, heretofore passed the Senate, excludes all cities where water works companies are already in operation. Toe amendment proposed is class legislation and nothing else, and should not be agreed to. A letter just received by him states that the citizens and authorities of Fort Wayne are very anxious for the passage of this bill. It is carefully guarded.
Mr. BRISCOE saw no necessity for the 10-mile provision in the bill. The St. Mary and St Joe river forms a confluence at Fort Wayne, and that city can have all the water she wants, without going 10 miles for it. Two miles is a reasonable distance; he therefore would support the amendment.
Mr. FOSTER was satisfied if this amendment be adopted the bill will be unconstitutional.
Mr. LANGDON regarded the amendment as going beyond, the restrictions imposed by the constitution on legislative power. It ought to he within the power of the cities to employ any and every means to procure pure and wholesome water, and whether it is within one or ten miles is immaterial. They should be allowed to bring it from any distance they ;ire willing to pay for. There are provisions in this bill which prevent any advantage being taken of vested rights, or any abuse practiced under it.
Mr. SARNIGHAUSEN favored the 10 mile provision of the bill, so the city might have the advantage of it in cases of necessity or emergency.
The amendment was rejected.
Mr. MENZIES moved to strike out the word "artificial," wherever it occurs in the bill. He saw strong and cogent reasons for this amendment, in order to strike down incursions upon vested and private rights.
Mr. KRAMER moved to strike from the bill the words "incorporated town" wherever they occur. He said this bill proposes to place the right to levy taxes and construct costly and expensive water works, even where they can not afford such luxuries. Suppose town trustees conclude to have a job in the building of water works, they should be restrained by such an amendment as this. Trustees have now too much power, and the result is that most all the cities and towns in. the State are largely in debt.
It was rejected.
Mr. LEEPER moved to amend sec. 1 by providing that bonds should not be sold for less than 97 cents on the dollar. To say that incorporated towns may negotiate bonds, on any condition or terms they can obtain, is a dangerous power. It was agreed to.
Mr. MENZIES moved to amend sec. 2 by providing that nothing herein shall be construed to authorize the taking or condemning of any artificial water course belonging to any individual or corporation.
Mr. STREIGHT thought the bill should be so amended that two-thirds of the voting population be required to petition therefor before the authorities can proceed in the matter of building water works.
The amendment was rejected.
Mr. URMSTON believed the bill should be referred to another committee, that it may have an opportunity to engraft in the bill the provisions of law referred to in the bill. He made a motion that it be referred to a special committee of three.
Mr. WOOD desired not to throw any obstructions in the way of the passage of this bill, as far as Fort Way nets concerned, but the second section was very dangerous, because under it any three trustees could burden a small or a large town with a very heavy debt; and under it they could also rob real estate owners. Shear off some of the power conferred by this section and he would vote for the bill. The motion to refer was agreed to.
The Lieutenant GOVERNOR makes the
On motion by Mr. WIER, his bill [S. 166] to repeal all laws for the levy of a cash poll tax, was read the second time, with a favorable committee report thereon.
Mr. TRAYLOR objected to this bill becoming a law because it would relieve all the young men in the State from paying a poll or head tax. If this poll tax is swept away, the tax wil1 have to be made up on the 40 acre tract of the poor man or the lone widow. The poll tax is a source of revenue in every town, township and county in the State. Young men are better able to pay poll tax than the poor farmer or mechanic, who must pay more tax to make up the deficiency.
Mr. WIER claimed the bill demands four days' work on the highway, which is as much as should be called for as a poll tax. The present operation of the poll tax law is very heavy on the poor men--in some places four or five dollars--which amounts to an outrage in very many cases. This tax should be taken off the poor men and put on property.
Mr. MENZIES--To say any man can enjoy the protection of society and contribute nothing to the support of government is wrong in principle, and evil in its effect. The bill would relieve the improvident and careless from paying one of the easiest and lightest of taxes. It proposes class legislation of the most vicious character.
Mr. HARRIS--There is no right more sacred than protection to person, and any man asking or expecting such protection ought to be taxed. This bill should not be passed, as it is class legislation--it is saying that all tax shall be collected from property only. It would be a misfortune to the people to say a certain class of men are not liable to pay any tax.
Mr. WIER disclaimed any intention by this bill to wipe out the road tax, and if it so
reads he was willing to have it changed. It is the last part only he desired to wipe
out, and it is
Mr. HEFRON failed to see how this bill could be denominated class legislation. It is broad and sweeping in it terms. As to the objection: the escape of young men from the poll tax if we repeal this law: nine-tenths of them escape now. The people who will be benefitted by this bill are the married men whose little store of furniture is likely to be dragged out in the street and sold by the tax gatherer. Thia measure is a just and fair one, intended to benefit that class of men. who are needy. There is no injustice in it.
Mr. VIEHE thought the poor man was sufficiently protected now. Government should be looked at in a business point of view. If property or person is protected that protection should be paid for, whether the man be rich or poor. He opposed the repeal of the poll tax.
Mr. STREIGHT moved the bill be recommitted with instructions to prepare an amendment to exempt all property now exempt from execution.
Mr. MENZIES moved to amend by indefinitely postponing the bill.
Then came the recess till 2 o'clock.
The motion to indefinitely postpone the bill and report, was rejected by--yeas 14, nays 24.
0n motion by Mr. WIER, his bill [S. 144] was referred to a special committee of three, viz: Messrs. Wier, Dice and Wood.
Mr. WILSON introduced a bill [S. 639] extending the time for stay of executions, which, on his motion, was referred to Messrs. Briscoe, Woollen and Urmston without reading.
On motion by Mr. COFFEY, his bill [S. 61] was read the second time and ordered engrossed.
Mr. COFFEY explaining: The practice of sheriffs in many counties is to appoint a number of unnecessary bailiffs, and if this bill be passed the sheriff can only appoint by consent of the court, the object being to curtail the number of bailiffs.
On motion by Mr. LANGDON, his bill [S. 207] for the determination and allowance of claims against the State. was read the second time.
Mr. LANGDON said there should be some limitation to claims accruing before the passage of the act. There are some claims originating before the limit named in this bill that could be substantiated in a court of justice more clearly than many claims that would undoubtedly, under every rule of justice, be allowed by any court, in the land.
Mr. REEVE desired to see the individual protected. The State being sovereign it is to be presumed she will properly adjust all claims against herself. Ought not the statute to provide that every claim now existing should be presented within six years from the taking effect of this act, and any claim arising hereafter shall be presented within six years after they become due and payable? He offered a substitute for the report to this effect.
Mr. VIEHE thought this a very important bill, and should favor any measure looking to taking from before the General Assembly, any and all matters except these having direct reference to legitimate legislation.
Mr. WOOD favored the substitute. The substitute was agreed to upon a division--affirmative 26. negative 12.
The committee report as amended, was concurred in.
Mr. WOOD offered an amendment to exclude from consideration all claims known as the Morgan raid or Wabash and Erie canal claims.
Mr. LANGDON said these claims are barred by the substitute just adopted.
Mr. WOOD feared, unless specially barred. that by some special plea the claims referred to might be presented and by a misconstruction of the provisions of this bill acted upon. If the amendment does no good, it can do no harm.
The amendment was agreed to by--yeas 37,nays9.
Mr. TAYLOR ineffectually moved to amend sec. 10 by admitting claims for ditching done under the law of May 20, 1852, if presented within two years.
The bill as amended was passed the second reading and ordered to be engrossed.
Mr. BURRELL moved to dispense with the regular order of business and take up the bill [S. 54] to apportion the State for senatorial and representative purposes.
Mr. HARRIS said on his side of the House they were ready at the time set for the consideration of this bill, but at the instance of the other side the matter has been postponed from day to day, and now he moved that it be put off till to-morrow morning.
On motion of Mr. MENZIES--yeas 26, nays 25--the Lieutenant Governor giving the casting vote in the affirmative--this motion was laid on the table.
Mr. BURRELL demanded the previous question, which was seconded by the same vote. The main question was ordered by a similar vote--the Lieutenant Governor giving the casting affirmative vote in each instance. The motion to take up the bill S. 54 was then agreed to without a division. The bill was then read the second time, with a report of the committee thereon.
Mr. BURRELL moved to amend the committee's report by substituting new matter; and on that motion demanded the previous question, which was seconded by the Senate, and under its operation the was adopted, by yeas 26, nays 25. The report of the committee as amended was adopted.
Mr. BURRELL moved the bill be ordered engrossed, and on that motion demanded the previous question, which was seconded by the Senate, and under its operation the bill was ordered engrossed, by yeas 26, nays 25, (the Lieutenant Governor giving the deciding affirmative vote)as follows:
Those who voted in the affirmative were: Messrs. Benz, Briscoe, Burrell, Coffey,Donham, Foster, Fowler, Hart, Hefron, Kent, Kramer, Leeper, Major, Menzies, Peterson, Reeves, Reiley, Sarnighausen, Tarlton, Traylor, Urmston, Viehe, Wood, Woollen, Winterbotham, Mr. President--26.
Those who voted in the negative were: Messrs. Cadwallader, Cornstock, Davenport, Davis, Dice, Garrigus, Grubbs, Harris, Heilman, Kahlo, Langdon, Mercer. Moore, Olds, Poindexter, Ragan, Shaffer, Shirk, Smith, Streight, Taylor, Treat, Trusler, Weir, Wilson--25.
Mr. BURRELL moved to suspend the order of business and take up the bill [S. 35] to divide the State into congressional distrlcts, and on that motion, demanded the previous question, which was secured by--yeas 26, nays 25. The main question was ordered by--yeas 26, nays 25. The motion to take up the bill was agreed to by yeas 26, nays 25--the lieutenant governor giving the casting vote on each call of the yeas and nays--and the bill S. 35 was read the second time, with a report from the committee thereon, recommending the adoption of a substitute therefor.
Mr. BURRELL offered a substitute for the report, on which he demanded the previous
question. The Senate seconded the demand, and under its operations the substitute was
agreed to by--yeas 26, nays 2?. The report, as amended, was adopted by the same vote,
the
Mr. BURRELL moved the bill be ordered engrossed, and on that motion demanded the previous question, which was seconded by--yeas 26, nays 25. The main question was ordered and the bill ordered engrossed by the same vote, the lieutenant-governor giving the casting affirmative vote in each instance.
On motion by Mr. HEILMAN the bill [S. 347] authorizing the change of the name of Evansville to Lamasco--by vote of a majority was read the second time, considered engrossed under a dispensation of the constitutional rule--yeas 45, nays 0--and passed the Senate by yeas 47, nays 0.
On motion by Mr. GRUBBS, the bill [H. R. 187) defining the meaning of the first proviso of the second section of the act of March 2, 1875, providing for the relocation of county seats, was read the third time and passed, by yeas 43, nays 3--Messrs. Fowler, Poindexter and Wilson.
On motion by Mr. VIEHE, the bill [H. R. l35] to legalize acts of the board of trustees of Shelbourne, was read the second time, and, under a dispensation of the constitutional rule, pressed to the final reading, and passed by yeas 46, nays 2.
On motion by Mr. TRAYLOR, his bill [S. 176] to legalize the official act of the town or Jasper, was read the second time and ordered engrossed.
On motion by Mr. WOOD, his bill [S. 94] limiting the height of hedge fences along public roads, was read the second time and ordered engrossed.
Mr. LANGD0N moved to take up his resolution dividing the State into congressional districts.
Mr. BURKELL demanded a call of the Senate, which being taken, discovered 47 senators present, and answering to their names. On motion of Mr. Woolen the Senate adjourned by yeas 25, nays 24--the lieutenant, governor giving the casting affirmative vote for the sixteenth time this afternoon.
And so the Senate adjourned.
The reading of the minutes of Saturday's proceedings was dispensed with.
The following engrossed Senate bills were read the second time, by title only, and referred to appropriate committees, unless otherwise stated:
The bill, [S. 140] to authorize the surrender of city charters; [S. 180] in relation to divorces; [S. 118] to amend the practice act, was passed to the second reading; [S. 338] in relation to plank, macadamized and gravel roads; [S. 353] how lands in cities may be taxed; [S. 382] for a uniform assessment of property; [S. 18] concerning canal lands patents; [S. 27] for the government and discipline of the State prisons; [S. 119] to abolish the superior court in Gass county; [S. 43] to exempt the wages of laborers from garnishment [S. 26] defining embezzlement; [S. 187] for the election and appointment of supervisors; [S. 65] to prevent the publication of libel; [S. 184] to prevent the practice of resorting to distant courts to oppress citizens; [S. 254] providing for the payment of judges and attorneys holding courts in certain cases; [S. 209] authorizing appeals from boards of county commissioners; [S. 47] to enable owners of wet lands to drain the same; [S. 37] to enable county boards to dispose of uncalled for allowances ;[S. 331] to authorize school trustees of cities or towns to pay over special school revenue; [S. 365] for the relief of the Lye Creek Draining association.
House bills introduced and described in these reports of Saturday, numbered 610 to 632, inclusive, were read the second time by title only, and referred to appropriate committees,except the bill [H. R. 629] to repeal the act to provide for township elections, which was ordered to be engrossed.
Mr. Johnson's resolution amending the rules so that on the call of counties for the introduction of new propositions, each member shall have the privilege of calling up for final action one bill, was adopted.
Mr. WORKS moved that the favorable committee report or the bill, [H. R. 118] allowing a circuit court to each county, be concurred, in and the bill ordered engrossed.
Mr. STEVENS said a bill of this kind would disgrace our judicial system, and he would oppose the passage of any such measure. He was therefore opposed to its engrossment.
Mr. WORKS said he only wanted to get the bill in proper shape before the House, in order that their action thereon might be intelligent.
The House concurred in the report of the committee, bat refused to order the bill to the engrossment.
On the motion of Mr. BRIGGS, 500 copies of the codification of the school law [H. R. 620] was ordered printed in pamphlet form.
Mr. EDWINS, chairman of the
The report was concurred in and the bill ordered engrossed,
The
The House took a recess until 2 o'clock.
The following described bills for acts were introduced, read the first time, and passed to the second reading:
By Mr. OVERMEYER, [H. R. 633] to provide means for the erection of the new State House (three cents on the $100 for 1879; for 1880 four cents.) He also introduced a resolution, which was adopted, that the treasurer inform the House what balance of cash remained in the treasury on November 30, 1878, December 31, 1878, and January 31,1879; also what have been the receipts and disbursements since January 31,1879, and what the balance of cash on hand now is.
By Mr. CONFER, [H. R. 634] to amend section 8 of the subdivision of section 7 of an act to provide for an uniform assessment of taxes, etc.
By Mr. CUNNINGHAM, by request, [H. R. 635] to amend sections 1, 2 and 3 of an act to provide for the running at large of domestic animals.
By Mr. ROBINSON, [H. R. 636] to amend section 15 of an act to regulate elections.
were concurred in, unless otherwise stated, to wit:
Mr. OSBORNE, of Elkhart, from the Com-[mittee]
Mr. Tulley said the bill H. R. 148 was a bill which quite a number of the counties of the State were interested in, and he thought such a bill should be passed. He hoped that the report of the committee would not be concurred in. On his motion the report was laid on the table and the bill ordered engrossed.
Also the bills H. R. 57, 287,352, 441, 440, 434, 360, 170, 105, 274, 293, 232, 490, 165, 204, 523, 341, 474, 186 and 95, with a recommendation that they be indefinitely postponed--except the bill H. R. 95, which was ordered engrossed: also H. R. 416, 541, 50, 309, 308, 196, 579, 178, 248, 517, 13 and 600, with a recommendation that they lie on the table.
On the motion of Mr. Major the report of the committee on the bill H. R. 600 was laid on the table.
Mr. OVERMEYER said the consideration of the report of the committee on his bill [H.
R. 13] brought out the question whether we shall reduce the number of jurymen to
six. The
Mr. GORDON thought we had no right to cut down the number of jurors below the number that was required by the common law when the constitution was made.
Mr. 0SBORNE of Elkhart could not support the bill because he believed it was unconstitutional. If it could be done constitutionally he would support such a measure.
The House refused to concur in the report--yeas 33, nays 53. The bill was ordered engrossed.
Mr. BRIGGS, chairman of the
Mr. CAMPBELL hoped the report of the committee on the bill [H. R. 462] to abolish the superior court of Cass county would not be concurred in. He had a resolution from the three political parties asking that the superior court be abolished. He was instructed to work for its repeal, and he hoped the bill would pass.
Mr. SCHOLL had not a word of objection to abolishing the superior court in Cass county, but this bill goes further and asks for the reconstruction of the Thirty-ninth Judicial Circuit, and asks that Caps county be made a judicial chair of itself. He thought the report of the committee ought to be concurred in.
Mr. DAILEY was a member of that committee, and insisted that the resolutions of the political parties were for buncomb, with the view of catching votes. He understood that the courts were already overloaded with business. He was opposed to abolishing cozrts to gratify whims.
Mr. GORDON could see no objection to laying the report upon the table and let the bill come before the House, and as Cass county has demanded the abolishment of the superior court it ought to be done. Let us amend the bill and harmonize all parties.
Mr. Briggs held in his hands several petitions from heavy tax-payers asking that the superior court be continued, and protesting against repealing the law that organized the court. He urged that the House sustain the report of the committee.
Mr. Campbell said if they could get rid of Pulaski county in the judicial circuit they could do without the superior court. He said these petitions were signed under a misapprehension. There was no party in it whatever; it was a mere matter of economy. He made an ineffectual motion that the committee report be laid on the table.
The House then concurred in the report of the committee by--yeas 56, nays 29.
On the motion of Mr. HANDY, the bill, [H. R. 371] and report was laid on the table.
Mr. KESTER, from the
Mr. MIERS, from the
Mr. STUCKER said he hoped the report of the committee on the bill [H. R. 51] would not be concurred in. This bill is of great importance to the people of the State. It abolishes the office of county school superintendent and creates the office of school examiner, thereby saving to the people of the State at least $75,000 per annum. The school examiner can and will do all that is necessary to be done, and not cost the people one-tenth of what we now pay. The people demand that this surplus office shall be abolished and save that extra expense that is now enforced upon them. It is a settled fact that we have too many officers and we ought to curtail all that can be dispensed with. This is one that can be lopped off with good results, and our schools not impaired in the least.
Mr. DRAK said it was an outrage upon the dignity of the State to suppose that you could get a man qualified to discharge the duties of school superintendent for the pitiful sum of $2 a day.
Mr. TAYLOR,of Davis, said no one gloried more in the school facilities of Indiana than he did, but he thought this Legislature ought to do something to relieve the people of this incubus that rests upon this branch of the school department. It was to correct an abuse which prompted him to support a measure that would limit the time of service of this officer.
Mr. ALLEN, of Putnam, moved that the bill [H. R. 51] be recommitted to a special committee of five.
Mr. OSBORNE, of Elkhart, offered an amendment, which Mr. Edwins moved to lay on the table.
And then the House adjourned.
After prayer by Rev. E. A. Bradley, of Christ's church, the reading of the minutes was dispensed with.
On motion by Mr. REEVE, his bill [S. 390] to prevent certain live stock from running at large, with the bills, S. 67 and 49, on the same subject. A committee report presents a substitute for the three bills.
Mr. REEVE explained: The substitute provides that the board of commissioners may make an order to prevent the running at large of animals, except swine, but only on petition of a majority of the land owners. The hog cholera has spread all over the country by the running at large of hogs; those who live in the country know what an almost intolerable nuisance it is. No stock ought to be permitted to run at large, but as this is a compromise, he hoped it would speedily pass the Senate and be communicated to the House of Representatives. The pecuniary benefits of this bill is that it would save the people of the State more than all the public buildings cost, by requiring every man to fence only as against his own stock. No person shall be required to fence against stock running at large.
Mr. STREIGHT favored the substitute. If a man wants to let his stock run at large, all damage done by the stock ought to be paid for by the owner. The extra expense of keeping up fences. Millions of dollars of fence are kept up. The cost of keeping. The value of all the stock in the State would not amount to one-tenth the expense to farmers of keeping up fences required to keep out their neighbor's stock, and protect his cultivated land.
Mr. Tarlton favored the substitute.
Mr. HEFRON cited the fact that there are thousands of uncultivated acres, which afford grazing for the poor man's stock, not interfering with anybody. This State is not prepared for a law of this kind. For the purpose of testing the sense of the Senate he made n ineffectual motion--yeas 19, nays 29--that the whole subject lie on the table.
Mr. COMSTOCK regarded the substitute as the best proposition of the four on this subject, but the present law is preferable.
Mr. GARRIGUS: The present law being ineffectual some such measure as the one proposed ought to be passed.
Mr. LEEPER: Some of his constituents desired legislation on this subject, but he did not believe this bill was what they desired.
On motion by Mr. MENZ1ES the substitute was amended by providing that nothing herein contained shall be constructed so as to relieve any railroad company from keeping up fences.
Mr. VIEHE believed a large majority of his constituents are in favor of a stock law. The objection to the substitute is that it does not provide a penalty for the running at large of stock, except hogs.
The substitute, as amended, was adopted.
Mr. TRAYLOR thought there is inconsistency in the bill, and he doubted whether the proviso will meet the emergency intended. The stock being trespassing when killed by the cars, the railroad company will not be held responsible. And he proposed the section proposing a fine, and also liability for damages; thinking that a little too strong.
The bill passed the second reading by--yeas 26, nays 21, and was ordered engrossed.
On motion by Mr. COMSTOCK, his bill [S. 194, see these reports February 20 a. m.] to amend section 20 of the witness act, was read the third time, and passed by--yeas 36, nays 14.
Mr. REEVE and Mr. SHIRK stating they would be glad to have the bill go further, but as it is in the right direction it received their affirmative vote.
Mr. FOWLER, believing the bill would introduce an element of discord between man and wife, voted "no."
Mr. RAGAN, from the special committee thereon, returned his bill [S. 274] to relieve Thomas N. Jones, of Hendricks county, from a judgement taken against him on the official bond of Lawrence S. Shuler, late warden of the Southern prison, recommending its passage. The report was concurred in; the bill read the second time.
Mr. BURRELL insisted this is a case where the Legislature should not enter
satisfaction
Mr. STREIGHT: As a rule he favored holding bondsmen to their bonds, but this is an exceptional case. This man has but a little house worth the amount of the judgment and no more: kindness, good feeling and liberality should be exhibited here.
Mr. RAGAN admitted this might prove a dangerous precedent, but being personally acquainted with the facts, believed the State should not turn out one of its best citizens in his old age to the cold charities of the world. This judgment would sweep away his little home and leave him homeless.
Mr. SHIRK in a general way, would not favor such legislation, but there are some cases which should be made an exception, and this is one.
Mr. WITHERBOTHAM also thought extenuating circumstances were connected with this case.
Mr. TRAYLOR should vote against all such bills, and if this be a precedent we had as well burn statute books and abolish courts. This measure is against every principle of justice and right.
Mr. GARRIGUS regarded the general rule as a good one, but was favorably disposed to this measure, believeing it would, take the last dollar from this old gentleman.
Mr. REEVE opposed this bill, believing such an act would say to every man who goes abroad, "You may steal what you have a mind to, and be as big a defaulter as you please, the Legislature will relieve your bondsmen."
The Senate refused to order the bill engrossed by yeas 19, nays 29.
On motion of Mr. LANGDON, the state claims commission bill [S. 207-fully described in these reports of yesterday p. m.] was read the third time.
Mr. KRAMER opposed the bill, regarding it as a dangerous measure to transfer this power from the Legislature into the hands of State officers. If this bill should pass, there will be so many claims filed against the State, the Marion circuit court will be kept busy in their adjudication, and it will require more than one attorney-general.
Mr. LANGDON took distinct issue with the senator from Spencer [Mr. Kramer]. This bill puts a quietus on all claims over six years old, and it will save much time of this and other Legislatures.
Mr. VIEHE--The State ought to pay her debt like any individual. The only question is how to determine the justness of claims preferred against her. He favored the bill because under it justice can be better done to all parties, and much time will be saved to each General. Assembly, besides getting rid of lobbyists coming up at every session.
Mr. STREIGHT was unable to see why there should be any opposition to this bill. His only wonder was such a measure had not been passed long ago.
Mr. REEVE could imagine the opposition to this bill might grow out of the hope to galvanize old claims into new life. He would rather trust such a board as the one proposed than the 150 members of the Legislature, and regarded the bill as providing for as cheap, safe and just disposition of claims as could be devised.
Mr. TAYLOR favored the provisions of this bill until the Senate saw proper to restrict the limitation to six years. The State can not afford to refuse to pay her just debts to her citizens.
The bill passed the Senate by--yeas 41, nays 9.
Then came the recess till 2 o'clock,
On motion by Mr. FOWLER the bill, [H. R. 7] to regulate the working of coal mines, declaring a den upon the works and machinery, etc., was read the second time. Mr. STREIGHT deprecated action on so large and so important a bill unless it be printed so it can be more carefully considered. He made a motion to print 100 copies.
Mr. FOWLER and Mr. BRISCOE objected to the delay the printing would cause.
Mr. KENT said this was a strike in a new direction, and interferes to some extent with a vast amount of property in this State. But few are acquainted with the provisions of this bill. He desired the bill recommitted and printed.
Mr. HEILMAN reminded senators holding over of the right two years ago over a bill similar to this. It is an important measure, and the Senate ought to be cautious in acting upon it. In Clay county their are no mines over 70 feet in depth, but it is different down on the Ohio river. He knew of shafts sunk to the depth of 285 feet, and places where a single shaft cost $25,000. He opposed the bill, being in favor of cheap fuel for every inhabitant of the State,
Mr. MENZ1ES insisted that there is a demand for some stringent police regulation to protest human life in the mines of this State. There is a large class who delve in the bowels of the earth for their living and a day's delay is dangerous.
Mr. HEILMAN did not believe there had been a single life lost in the deep mines on the Ohio river in 30 years.
Mr. REEVE watched the reading of the bill as closely as he could. It is a bill of great importance and should receive all the consideration it can get. It affects some of the moat vital interests of the State. He defied any man, no matter how great his acquirements, to understand even its legal effects from the reading. The relation of capital to labor is involved in it:--one of the most profound studies of the age. If that bill becomes a law as it is now, it might destroy the mining interest of the State of Indiana, and the very object it is intended to accomplish. Police regulations should be made as nearly equal in their bearing and effects as possible. The bill goes down to the miserable pettifogging known in justice's court, and should not be tolerated in legislation. On the pretext of protesting labor, there is dragged in this bill the very class of legislation that has been denounced here day after day.
Mr. WOOD did not think the friends of the bill should desire to press it through without other senators knowing much about it. He favored the motion to print.
Mr. STREIGHT could not see why the friends of the bill were so certain it will be defeated if printed, unless it is unworthy to be passed. He knew something of the spirit, that has been demanding this kind of legislation for years, and warned senators to act upon this subject with great care,
Mr. FOWLER characterized the argument just made as a very strange one, and contended that this bill will not interfere with the mining interests of the State. Such provisions have not interfered with the mining interests of States where similar laws have been passed, and this bill is a much more modified law than those of Ohio or Pennsylvania. There is not a word of truth in the argument that this bill would raise the prici1 of coal. It is only to project those unfortunate men who go down deep into the earth, there to labor day after day in order that we may enjoy the benefits of their labor.
The report of the committee, as amended,
On motion by Mr. HEFRON, his bill [S. 297] to abolish the office of state geologist was read the second time.
Mr. HEFRON said the office has outlived its usefulness, and now is an opportune time to get rid of it, as the occupant has tendered his resignation. There has been expended about $75,000 for this office since its creation in l869, and probably no citizen unconnected with the expenditure has been benefited one cent Save the geological survey it has been used as the means for advertising the wares of different persons throughout the State (in confirmation of which statement he read extracts from the reports of the state geologist). The agricultural interests would not suffer much it the entire State Board of Agriculture were wiped out. Two years ago the State voted $28,000 to the State Board, and now it is asking $10,000 more. Every senator concedes that taxation should be reduced, but how can taxation be reduced unless there to be a reduction in public expenditures? We must commence somewhere to cut off, and this is nothing but a withered limb on the trunk of the tree of the body politic.
Mr. LANGDON moved to amend so that the geological specimens shall go to "Purdue University" instead of the "State Board of Agriculture."
Mr. HARRIS thought the researches of the State geologist have been of great benefit to the State in years past--not so much recently its heretofore.
Mr. REEVE was unable to see any grounds for the ridicule and badinage sought to be, brought out in reference to the geological report. He argued against the passage of the bill, insisting that to strike out this department of the government would be consummate folly. He regarded it as a cheap investment, as contrasted with the great benefits derived from it.
Mr. HARRIS moved a substitute for the amendment by striking out the words "State Board of Agriculture" and inserting in lieu "The State Library."
Mr. FOWLER moved to amend the substitute by striking out the words "State University" and inserting in lieu the words "State Library."
This amendment was rejected.
Mr. SHAFFER hoped this bill would not be engrossed.
Mr. TREAT was not anxious that this bill should pass. The friends of the state geologist. claim his report is an advertisement of the resources of the State, and a very valuable one,too. The State University is the most appropriate place to put the collection referred to if the office should be abolished, but he was opposed to that proposition.
The amendment to the substitute was rejected by--yeas 11, nays 37. The substitute was adopted on a division--24 affirmative and 16 negative--and the bill ordered engrossed.
On motion by Mr. BURRELL, under his demand for the previous question, which was seconded by the Senate, the resolution [Mr. Langdon's] for a division of the State into congressional districts, was taken up by--yeas 40,nays 7.
On his further motion the resolution was indefinitely postponed by--yeas 25, nays 24--the lieutenant governor giving the casting vote--under the operation of the previous question demanded by Mr. Burrell.
On motion by Mr. STREIGHT his bill [S. 270] to reduce the number of superior courts in Marion county to three, was read the second time, the constitutional restriction dispensed with--yeas 39, nays 1--the bill was ordered engrossed, read the third time and passed by yeas 42, nays 1.
And then the Senate adjourned.
Prayer service this morning by Rev. Mr. JONES, of Brazil, of the First Presbyterian church.
The reading of the Journal was necessarily suspended, as the clerk had not produced it.
The motion of Mr. Allen, of Putnam, to refer the bill to abolish the office of county school superintendent [H. R. 51] to a select committee of five was agreed to, and the speaker made the committee to consist of Messrs. Allen of Putnam, Slacker, Humphreys, Copeland and Owen. The bill, H. R. 408, on the same subject was also referred to the same committee.
On the motion of Mr. HUBBARD the bill [H. R. 73] was amended and ordered engrossed.
Mr. FLODDER, chairman of the committee on trust funds, returned the bills H. R. 529 and 239 with favorable recommendations, which were concurred in.
Mr. MIERS, from the
Mr. EDWINS, chairman of the
Mr. OVERMEYER offered an amendment that the provisions of this bill shall not apply to existing contracts. The amendment was accepted.
Mr. HUMPHREYS moved to amend by striking out "$1,000" and insert "$500" in lieu, and that the debtor shall have the right to take either real or personal, as he shall elect; which was ruled out of order.
Mr. ALLEN, of Putnam, moved to amend by making it $1,000, either personal or real.
Mr. WATSON was in favor of a $1,000 real homestead, but was opposed to exempting so large an amount of personal.
Mr. SHANKS said this bill, as reported by the committee, is shorn of one-half of its virtues. it has been changed from its original, character of securing. In the language of the constitution, "The privilege of the debtor to enjoy the necessary comforts of life shall be enjoined by wholesome laws, exempting a reasonable amount of property from seizure or sale for the payment of any debtor liability hereafter contracted," and by this report now concurred in to grant to those who have lands, $1,000 worth of real estate, and to those who do not own laud, only the poor. $200, now in mockery allowed the debtor--under the present law. This is an unjust discrimination against the laborer that the land owner does not ask us to make in their favor. it is not criminal to not own land, nor is it an especial virtue to own land. The provisions of the bill to secure to the mechanic his tools, to the trader his substance, for the support of their families, has been stricken out of the bill. He desired to reconsider the vote by which the report was concurred in, so that we may do equal justice to all the people before the laws of the State. He, therefore, moved that the vote by which the report was concurred in be reconsidered.
Mr. MIERS hoped the motion to reconsider would prevail. He wanted to see equality in the matter, and was in favor of a $1,000 exemption whether it was wrapped up in a homestead or not.
Mr. OWEN thought the object was to make a permanent population, and if we make the exemption either personal or real, it would destroy the object of the bill and take away the merit of it.
Mr. CONNER said that personal property exemption, was embraced in the bill. The theory of the bill was to encourage our citizens to secure permanent homes.
Mr. EDWINS said the committee after examining a number of bills on the same subject had concluded with the amendments reported to recommend the passage of this bill. A real homestead worth $1,000 and the $300 already allowed by statute would be the best law we could enact for the poor man. It would make better citizens, and so he was in favor of the passage of the bill.
Mr. TULLEY said it was the homestead exemption in this bill that recommended it to him. There is no greater incentive to a man than that he can take his little earnings and put them in a home and know that he has the protection of law in so doing. It would encourage men to save their dollars and put them into a home. It not only encouraged the man, but each member of the family. He hoped the motion to reconsider would not prevail.
Mr. TAYLOR, of Warrick, thought this bill did not encourage the poor man. He thought they should have the right to put their money in anything they may see fit, either personal or real. He would not vote for this kind of a bill.
Mr. BRIGGS said under the provisions of this bill just as soon as the homestead gets to be worth over $1,000 the creditor has the privilege to call in appraisers and scalp it of all over that amount. He was opposed to that kind of a law, and this Legislature ought not to pass such a law. He was opposed to the amendment [Mr. Overmeyer's] for he thought that if the law ever intended to relieve its citizens and allow them an exemption, It ought to be done now.
Mr. SAINT said he was in favor of a $1,000 exemption, but was opposed to confine it exclusively to a homestead. As he understood this bill, every dollar that a man was willing to lay by for a homestead was subject to execution. He thought this was wrong; and he thought it an unjust discrimination. He claimed that the $1,000 was just as sacred to the man in business as to the man who would invest it in a homestead,
Mr. MARCH said we were compelled to operate on general principles. He would go as far as any one to relieve those who are laboring under the burden of indebtedness, but the supreme court had decided that the Legislature can not make a law that would affect existing contracts. It is the laborer that the law should cherish, and he wanted to give him a homestead.
Mr. JOHNSON said the question seemed to be whether this exemption shall be in real or in real and personalty. He deemed it unjust to discriminate between the man who holds real estate and the man who has none. He was in favor of the $1,O00 exemption, and let them take it in either real or personal property.
Mr. WATSON said that other States had enacted such exemption laws, and had specified first a homestead, and second specified personal property, He was for the $1,000 homestead exemption, because thus far it was right, and he was also in favor of increasing the personal property exemption to $500.
Mr. FAULKNER wanted to know how the man was to work up to the $1,000, if he was in debt to begin with. He was in favor of the $1,000 exemption in either crawfish holes (as the gentleman from Marion [Mr. Herod] the other day designated the land in Ripley county,) or personal property.
The vote by which the House concurred in the report of the committee was reconsidered by yeas 61, nays 34.
The question then recurring upon concurrence in the report of the committee--which strikes oat the personal property clause, (leaving $1,000 as a homestead and the old law of $300 personalty), the House refused to concur in the report by yeas 31, nays 60.
On the motion of Mr. MARCH the bill was recommitted to a select committee of five with instructions to report to-morrow.
The House then took up the message annoucning that the Senate had refused to concur in
the amendments of the House to the interest bill [H. R. 277], and had appointed a
Mr. EDWINS, from the same committee, returned the bills H. R. 82, 86, 417, 941, 448, 240,212, 560, 291,162, 147, 115, 264, 299, 193, 215,180, 226 with favorable reports thereon, which were concurred in except as stated below.
The House refused to concur in the report of the committee on the bill [H. R. 448] excepting rat and bull terrier dogs from taxation, and on the motion of Mr. JOHNSON the bill was laid on the table by--yeas 57, nays 32.
The same committee returned the bills H. R. 98, 137, 296, 292 for indefinite postponement, and H. R. 278 to lie on the table, which reports were severally concurred in.
The House refused to concur in the report of the committee on the bill [H. R. 215] to prohibit the carrying of dead hogs through the highways.
The report of the committee on the bill [H. R. 292] for an exemption of personal property to the amount of $500, was laid on the table, and the bill was referred to the select committee on the same subject.
Pending the consideration of the bill [H. R. 226] the House took the recess for dinner.
On motion by Mr. OSBORNE, of Elkhart, the special order--being the consideration of the bill [H. R. 344] on fees and salaries, was taken up, and the amendments, as reported by the committee, were ordered to be considered by sections.
Mr. HUMPHREYS offered a resolution. which was adopted, that the auditor report the names and amount due to special judges, to this House, in order that the same may be embraced in the specific appropriation bill.
On the motion of Mr. HESS and Mr. TULLEY, the report of the committee thereon and the bill [H. R. 226] to repeal the act authorizing loan associations, pending at adjournment for dinner, was laid on the table.
Mr. MIERS said he believed this House as well as the
Mr. MIERS moved that the action of the House heretofore made that the bill shall be taken up by paragraphs or sections be reconsidered.
Mr. THAYER was opposed to a reconsideration,but was in favor of sticking to the bill until something could be done, and either pass or reject it.
Mr. BRIGGS was in hopes that the bill would be stuck to until disposed of.
Mr. WILLARD said it had been before the
On the motion of Mr. OWEN the motion to reconsider was laid on the table.
Mr. JOHNSON offered an amendment to the first section to reduce the governor's salary from "five" to "four" thousand dollars per annum.
Mr. SHANKS moved to amend the amendment by striking out 4 and inserting $3,000, which was rejected by--yeas 17, nays 75.
Mr. Johnson's amendment was then adopted by--yeas 62, nays 31.
Mr. EDWINS moved to strike "1,500" in the salary of the governor's private secretary and insert "$1,000."
Mr. BARKER moved to amend the amendment by making it $1,200.
On the motion of Mr. JOHNSON the amendments were laid on the table--yeas 69, nays 25.
Mr. REED moved to strike out 1,500 and insert $2,000.
Mr. M1ERS was in favor of making a fair reduction, and he believed that the secretary could earn $2,000.
On the motion of Mr. BARKER the amendment was laid on the table.
Mr. JOHNSON moved to strike out $2,000, as the salary of the Secretary of State, and insert $1,500.
On the motion of Mr. NAVE the amendment was laid on the table.
Mr. LEHMAN made an ineffectual motion to reduce the salary to $1,250.
Mr. WORKS: Strike out and insert, "for each certificate and seal, 50 cents; for each commission issued to any officer to whom a commission is required by law to be issued, $1; for each attestation and seal, 50 cents;" which wis adopted by--yeas 56, nays 4.
Mr. WILLARD moved to make the salary of secretary of State $2,500.
Mr. GORDON moved to amend the amendment by making the salary $3,000.
Mr. THAYER could not see why it was gentlemen should vote for such large salaries. He would venture to say that our State officers have been receiving three times as much as they could have made in any other profession. He was willing to make this salary $2,500. He was willing to pay what the officers were worth, and no more.
Mr. GORDON said after we had taken the fees from this officer less than $3,000 would be too small a salary. He was in favor of paying these officers a fair salary in order that they might live like gentlemen and not as beggars.
Mr. MIERS said the fees that had been cut off would amount to about $3,000, and in view of that fact he was willing to raise the salary $1,000. He did not think that the secretary and his two deputies could live on $3,800 a year.
The amendment to the amendment [Mr. Gordon's] was rejected by--yeas 41, nays 53.
Mr. Willard's amendment was then adopted.
Mr. FAULKNER moved to amend by adding that the auditor shall pay in all fees from foreign insurance companies, which was rejected.
Mr. WORKS moved that the salary be $2,500, and be allowed all fees and commissions heretofore allowed by law. He said that, this would place the auditor on an equal footing with the Secretary of State.
Mr. GORDON said that the duties and responsibilities of the Auditor of State are nearly double that of Secretary of State. He moved to amend the amendment by making the salary $4,000. We ought not to forget that the present incumbent was a hero of two wars.
Mr. SHANKS said that if we must consider the matter of reward for military service we would find ourselves embarrassed in the county offices on every hand.
Mr. MIERS thought it would be more in keeping to make the amount $6,000 for the pay of four men in so important an office. We can't do ourselves justice by making the auditor's salary less than $4,000.
Mr. SLEETH said there was a large amount of work in the auditor's office. If he knew how to count, the fees of the auditor would amount to $6,000, and the bill allows clerk hire besides. He was in favor of a fixed salary for the auditor, and let the fees be paid into the State treasury. Four thousand dollars should be the extreme limit.
Mr. MARCH said we were not legislating now for the present incumbent. We are fixing a salary for this office now and for years to come. He thought $2,500 or $3,000 ample compensation.
The amendment to the amendment [Mr. Gordon's] was rejected by--yeas 13, nays 51.
Mr. HESS moved to amend the amendment [Mr. Willard's] by striking out $2,500 and inserting $3,000.
Mr. SLEETH said that according to a resolution, adopted heretofore by the House, to hear the ladies' argument on women's suffrage, the hour having arrived, he therefore thought the House should take a recess.
The SPEAKER then introduced successively Mrs. Governor WALLACE, who proceeded to read a memorial upon the subject of women's rights; Mrs. Dr. HAGGART, who addressed the House on the same subject; Mrs. Dr. MARY THOMAS, of Richmond, who addressed the House upon the legal aspect of the subject, and Mrs. Mamie E. Duon, who discoursed on the subject of representative women.
Mr. HUBBARD offered a resolution That, having heard the unanswerable arguments of the women who have to-day presented their claims to equal suffrage, with deep humiliation, and a burning sense of shame for any neglected duty, do now pledge our honor, our influence and our votes, that we will enact such laws as will give them equal rights as citizens with ourselves.
It was referred to the
Mr. TAYLOR, of Daviess, offered a resolution which was adopted, inquiring into the expediency of reporting a bill extending the right of suffrage to woman.
And the House adjourned.
On motion by Mr. WOOD, the reading of the minutes was dispensed with, the city ward laying-out bill [S. 425 see the reports of February 20], was read the second time and ordered engrossed.
Mr. TREAT offered a resolution, for a committee of three, to ascertain what portion of the geological cabinet is the property of the State, which was amended by Mr. Reeve so as to require a full inventory of all such specimens; and by Mr. Dice further amended so as to inquire why annual reports have not been made by the State geologist for the past three years; and then the resolution as amended was adopted.
On motion by Mr. WIER, his bill [S. 144] to abolish the cash poll-tax, was read the second time.
Mr. HARRIS, beside other objections, regarded a provision in this bill, which he pointed out as unconstitutional, and hoped the bill would not be ordered to the engrossment.
Mr. WIER would not yield his judgment to lawyers and other objectors to this bill, but contended the bill in its present form was right, and should be passed.
Mr. REEVE insisted the bill means nothing as it reads now, or if it means anything it means that no poll-tax can be levied less $1, and there are two provisions in the constitution with which it conflicts. On his motion the bill and report were laid on the table upon a division--affirmative 23, negative 17.
On motion By Mr. FOWLER the bill [H. R. 112] for the appointment [by the governor] of the trustees of the Benevolent Institutions of the State, was read the second time with a favorable majority and an adverse minority report, recommending indefinite postponement, but if the bill does pass it be amended so that the governor shall appoint but one trustee, and the other to hold over.
Mr. STREIGHT demanded a division of the questions embraced in the minority report; first on the recomendation for indefinite postponement. The bill contemplates, he said, by one stroke of the pen, to remove every man who has had experience in these institutions. Why this resolution? The only answer is: to satisfy the demands of a few political place-seekers. No senator having the good of these institutions at heart can desire such a sweeping resolution.
Mr. FOWLER apprehended nothing that could be said would change the mind of a single senator on this subject; he therefore moved to reject the minority report, and on that motion demanded the previous question; which being seconded by the Senate, under its operation; the minority report was rejected by yeas 26, nays 25--the lieutenant governor giving the casting affirmative vote Messrs. Grubbs and Menzies explaining.
Mr. HARRIS made an ineffectual motion--yeas 25, nays 26--to indefinitely postpone the majority report--the lieutenant governor giving the casting vote.
Mr. STREIGHT moved to amend section. one by providing that no appointment shall be made, except to fill vacancies as they may occur, which, under the operations of the previous question demanded by Mr. BURRELL, was rejected by yeas 26, nays 25--the LIEUTENANT GOVERNOR giving the casting rejective vote.
Mr. MENZIES moved that the bill be adopted as a whole and placed on the calendar, and on that motion demanded the previous question. The Senate refused to second the demand for the previous question by--yeas 24, nays 26.
Mr. REEVE voting "no," because this motion would cut off all opportunity for amendment of the bill. He said he would not be satisfied with this bill unless amended, as it ought, to be, and as was distinctly understood it should be. He opposed any material amendment in its important features, but insisted on the two simple amendments he indicated.
Mr. SHIRK offered an amendment fixing the salaries of the trustees of the Insane, and Deaf and Dumb at the present rate.
Mr. FOWLER moved to reject the amendment, and on that motion demanded the previous
question which was seconded and the
Mr. REEVE offered an amendment allowing the superintendent of each to reside in the Institution, which was agreed to by yeas 40, nays 9.
Mr. STREIGHT moved to recommit the bill with instructions to amend so as not to in- crease the compensation of any officer, and 100 copies of the bill be printed. He defied any Senator to vote on that bill intelligently unless printed and laid before him. The people are not prepared to nearly double the salaries of some of these officers, as is proposed by some of the pro visions in the bill.
Mr. GRUBBS appealed to Senators to consider this subject above party. He believed one of the purposes of the bill was to take the question of the government of the Benevolent institutions out of party. They ought to be made the honor and glory of Indiana; and therefore he favored the general principle of this bill, but desired time to consider its many new features.
Mr. MENZIES pemanded the previous question, which was seconded by yeas 29, nays 25, and under its operation the motion to recommit was rejected by yeas 25, nays 26--the LIEUTENANT GOVERNOR giving the casting vote in each case.
Mr. REEVE moved to amend by allowing the family of the superintendent to board in the Institution, where he has his home therein; which was agreed to.
Mr. STREIGHT moved to postpone till 9 o'clock Monday next the further consideration of this subject). He regarded such an important measure as worthy of discussion. It contains some very good features, and some very bad features--the letter should be amended. But we are asked to consider a bill of such great importance, and are compelled to sit here beyond the time for noon recess, in order that the bill may be passed without being printed, when nine-tenths of the majority, to say nothing of the minority, of the Senate, know very little about its provisions. He yielded the floor for that purpose, and--
Then came the recess till 2 o'clock.
Mr. STREIGHT continued his remarks for some time. When he had concluded--
Mr. FOWLER thought discussion of the bill unnecessary for the Republican side, and was sure the Democrats had their minds made up, and seeing no reason for protracted discussion he demanded the previous question, which was seconded by the Senate, and under its operation the motion to postpone the bill was rejected by-yeas 23, nays 25.
On motion by Mr. REEVE the bill was further amended by appropriately inserting a proviso that upon removal of an officer the officer may have opportunity to answer and defend the charges against him.
Mr. FOWLER moved to adopt the bill as amended.
Mr. HARRIS made an ineffectual motion--yeas 26, nays 25--to lay this motion on the table.
The bill as amended was then adopted--by yeas 25,nays 24--the LIEUTENANT GOVERNOR giving the casting vote in esdi instance.
On motion by Mr. VIEHE, the bill [S. 399] to provide for the submission to the qualified voters of the State the proposed amendments to the constitution, was read the second time, with committee amendments.
Mr. HARRIS thought the bill needed no amendment, unless in regard to the time for elections, and in order to test the sense of the Senate he moved to amend the report by providing for submitting the amendments to vote in October, 1880, instead of April.
Mr. VIEHE saw no difficulty in submitting the amendments in April, when, if adopted, they would dispense with October elections. The registry amendment is of no force and effect until after the Legislature can enact such a law. He hoped the report of the committee would be concurred in.
The amendment was rejected.
Mr. TAYLOR moved ineffectually to amend by providing that if the third amendment to the constitution be adopted the fall elections shall occur in November instead of October.
The committee amendments were concurred in.
On motion by Mr HARRIS, the constitutional restriction was dispensed with--yeas 45, nays 3. The bill read the third time and passed by yeas 40, nays 7.
On motion by Mr. SHIRK, his bill, [S. 69, see these reports Feb. 21,a.m.] to establish an asylum for feeble-minded children, was read the third time.
Mr. WOODS objected to establishing at this time, above all others, a new institution of this kind. The people don't demand it. Then he declared this Legislature can not convert the Soldiery' Orphans' home into an institution of this kind, in proof or which statement he sent to the clerk's desk and had read the original deeds of these land to the State. Upon the score of expense it is wrong to build up a new institution until the State House is completed.
Mr. WOOLLEN: It is a needed charity to provide for a class of persons almost as helpless as the insane; and this unfortunate class should not be excluded from the benevolence of the State. In a few more years there will be no more soldiers' orphans left to be taken care of, and he hoped the construction placed upon the deeds by the senator from Lake [Mr. Woods] may be erroneous, so the property may be used for the purposes indicated in this bill.
Mr. BURRELL thought no lawyer would contend but that a deed can be made to the trustees of the new institution by the present trustees who now hold it in trust for the State. But he opposed this bill as being a sucker that would draw from the State thousands of dollars at first, which sum would be rapidly increased with the lapse of time. It would be an unnecessary drain upon the tax payers of the State.
Mr. STREIGHT: Indiana is behind other States in this matter of providing for the education of this class of children. Why delay? The sum asked for is small. The people of this State are not as close-fisted as some senators would lead us to believe.
Mr. FOWLER could see nothing in the way of the transfer of the property. He favored this bill because it costs nothing. The orphan's home must be retired before many years, and this bill does not interfere with the two hundred children there. He would favor the bill even if it asked for an appropriation of $50,000. On the question of economy this measure should be passed. Out of 1,000 such children in the State at least one-half are in the poor houses. They should be educated so they can earn their own livelihood and something more.
Mr. URMSTON insisted this measure is not well understood. It proposes to establish an institution--asking how for an appropriation, of $2,000, but could there be any assurance that more than ten times that amount will not be called for in two years hence, and every two years thereafter in the same proportion?
Mr. WOOD was not willing to turn the sol-[diers]
Mr. REEVE combatted the idea that any difficulty would occur in the transfer of the property referred to. The property is absolutely vested in the State, with no trust attached. He would favor the bill, but would like to see it amended in several particulars. It would be a measure of economy and reduce taxation generally, instead of increasing it. At any rate the State can afford to make the experiment.
Mr. BURRELL regarded this as a useless institution, and one that ought not to be fastened upon the people of the State.
Mr. SHIRK combatted the opinions expressed by some that this would be a costly institution. In other States they have done a vast amount of good. The Ohio Institute, which now contains 450 inmates, started with 15. No benevolent institutions ever established have done as much good as those of this kind. It is not intended to turn out the soldiers' and seamen's orphans by this bill. They are becoming less in number every year, and in a short time there will be few, if any, left; and this institution is intended to step in and take the place of the other.
The bill was passed the Senate by yeas 33, nays 14.
Mr. MENZIES introduced a bill [S.440] to repeal the act to fix the number of senators and representatives, of December 27, l862; and
Mr. HEILMAN introduced a bill [S. 441] to amend section 1 of an amendatory act concerning manufacturing companies, etc , which were severally read the first time.
And then the Senate adjourned.
In the proceedings of Tuesday Senator Fowler is wrongly reported as offering an amendment to transfer the specimens in the State Geologist's office to the "State Library." His motion was to transfer them to the "State University at Bloomington."
The clerk's minutes of Monday's proceedings were read until the reading was dispensed with; as was also the reading of the journal of yesterday's proceedings.
Mr. HEROD, from a majority of the committee on State House investigation, reported that they find all changes made were in the interest of the Suite; the books of the State House commissioners well kept and in good order, and credit the board with having fully discharged their duty.
Mr. WILLARD submitted a minority report: that the evidence does not show fraud, but shows some changes in the original plans. and that the action of the board was unfair toward competing architects.
Mr. OSBORNE of Elkhart moved that these reports be referred to the
Mr. OVERMEYER said there was nothing to do with these reports but to refer them to the committee on ways and means as suggested, or spread them upon the journal, as there was no recommendation in either the majority or minority reports.
Mr. HEROD thought it was due the gentlemen of the State House commission, after having passed through the ordeal of an investigation, that some expression of the House should indicate their commendation to the State as faithful servants of the people.
On motion of Mr. ENGLISH, the minority report was laid on the table by--yeas 63, nays 31.
The House adopted the report of the majority by--yeas 71, nays 24.
The committee was then discharged.
Mr. OSBORNE, of Elkhart, moved to reconsider the vote of yesterday by which the House refused to allow the auditor of state a salary of $4,000.
Mr. OVERMEYER said: If we had started out right in fixing the salary of the Governor at $4,000 the salary of the Auditor of State should not be increased. He was opposed to reconsidering.
Mr. MIERS thought the Auditor's salary was too small, and he hoped the House would reconsider the vote.
Mr. GORDON said it was not honorable to the State to place the Auditor's salary at less than $4,O00. His labors will be much greater now during the building of the new State House. He favored the motion to reconsider.
Mr. OSBORNE, of Elkhart, was willing to stand upon the redaction of salaries as low as consistent. The Auditor stands at the door of the treasury, and therefore occupies a most responsible position. In his judgment $4,000 was enough.
Mr. VANPELT came here to reduce the salaries as low as possible. It was expected of these officers to furnish money for the expenses of the political campaign, and he was not in favor now of cutting down their salaries. He believed this bill was a fair bill all the way through.
Mr. JOHNSON said the reason that the people wanted the salaries reduced was to prevent corruption. The demand for the reduction of salaries should be in proportion to the business of the country. He thought $4,000 was too much.
Mr. SHANKS said the prices of commodities had gone down to the lowest level and the salaries of officers still stood at the highest point, and the people demand that their salaries shall be reduced to a corresponding level. He hoped this item would be left as passed upon yesterday.
Mr. TULLEY thought the friends of this bill ought not to insist on too much of a reduction. If we cut down these salaries with judgment, we shall be able to pass this bill, but if we run into parsimony, we will defeat it. He thought we ought to give the auditor of state at least $1,000.
Mr. WORKS said the salary was fixed yesterday at $2,500. The question before the House is: Are the services of the auditor worth $4,O00 per annum? If it was this House ought to allow it. and if not, the salary ought to be placed at what the services of the office are worth. He was opposed to a reconsideration.
Mr. HESS made an ineffectual motion to lay the motion to reconsider on the table--yeas 48, nays 48.
The motion to reconsider was agreed to by--yeas 48, nays 47.
Mr. GORDON moved that the salary of the auditor of State be $4,000.
Mr. MARCH said: Let us reduce the salaries to a reasonable compensation--$4,000 was unreasonable : $3,000 was enough.
Mr. SAINT came here pledged to the reduction of fees and salaries, and $4,000 was more than any man in the State was worth; $3,000 was ample compensation, and the action yesterday was about right.
Mr. JOHNSON said the National party, as well as the Democratic party, were pledged to a reduction of salaries.
Mr. TAYLOR, of Daviess, said so far as the
The amendment [Mr. Gordon's] was rejected by yeas 36, nays 58.
Mr. WORKS moved to amend by striking out $1,500 and inserting S2,500 in lieu, and adding that all fees shall be paid into the State treasury.
On motion by Mr. GORDON the amendment was laid on the table.
Mr. WORKS moved to reconsider the vote by which his amendment was laid on the table.
On motion by Mr. HUMPHREYS the latter motion was laid upon the table, by yeas 52, nays 45.
Mr. JOHNSON moved, ineffectually, to amend by striking out $2,000 and inserting $1,500, and by striking out for the deputy $1,500 and inserting $1,200.
Mr. JOHNSON moved to amend by making the salary of the attorney general $2,000 instead of $2,500, which was adopted by--yeas 49, nays 45.
Mr. BARKER moved, ineffectually, to amend by allowing the attorney general a deputy with a salary of $1,500.
Mr. CONNER moved, ineffectually, to make the salary of superintendent of public instruction $2,500 instead of $2,O0O.
Mr. SNODDY moved to amend by reducing the salary of the deputy of the superintendent of public instruction from $1,500 to $1,000.
Mr. Edwins moved to amend the amendment by making it 1,200.
On the motion of Mr. MIERS, the amendments were laid on the table.
Mr. MIERS moved to amend so that there shall be two clerks at $900 each, which was adopted by yeas 55, nay 35.
Mr. COPELAND moved to amend so as to strike out all that provides for an assistant State librarian. He said the statutes plainly says that the librarian shall not have an assistant.
The SPEAKER said so far as the law is concerned, we are making a new law, and said the only question before the House was, shall the librarian have an assistant?
The amendment [Mr. Copeland's] was rejected.
Then came the recess till 2 o'clock.
Mr. SAINT offered a resolution, which was adopted, directing the special committee to which was referred the investigation of the charges against the Benevolent institutions to hear the evidence in said charges and report to the House at the earliest possible period.
Mr. 0SBORNE of Elkhart moved a substitute for section 14 concerning fees of county clerks. He said the bill would increase the present fees of the clerks at least 50 per cent. over the law of 1875, and proceeded to prove that assertion by comparing the law of 1875 with the bill and with his proposed amendment.
Mr. HEROD made an ineffectual motion that the amendment lie on the table--yeas 25, nays 68.
Mr. WILLARD said it was a question whether when you cut out constructive fees the present law is not low enough. He did not want to act parsimoniously in this matter.
Mr. SAINT said he came here in the interest of the people, and as a demand was made for a reduction in fees and salaries he would go as far as any one to obtain that object. He did not want to reduce the fees and salaries below a just standard. He felt as though there was an unlawful attempt to defeat the object of a reduction of fees, and believed county officers had raised a large fund to accomplish that object; at least he knew that assessments had been made upon the officers of some of the counties of this State for money to be used in preventing any reduction of fees and salaries, and he thought this fact ought to be kept in mind during the consideration of this bill, and he referred to the matter now in the outset that members might be reminded of the influence at work to prevent a free and untrammeled action, and for his part he had promised his constituents last fall to labor unceasingly to reduce the enormous and unjust fees of county officers, by which they are enabled in many cases to amass a fortune in one or two terms of office, and he proposes to fulfill his pledges.
Mr. JOHNSON moved the adoption of the substitute for section 14, as submitted, by Mr. Osborne.
Mr. HESS was in favor of the amendment, as it was in the right direction, and he thought we were consuming too much time in the consideration of this matter.
The substitute was adopted by yeas 61, nays 21.
Mr. OSBORNE, of Elkhart, moved as an amendment to section 15, a substitute, which. was also adopted.
On motion by Mr. WILLARD section 10 was amended by adding thereto the words, "When such estate is claimed by the widow."
Mr. OSBORNE, of Elkhart, moved to amend section 18 by providing that "Circuit judges shall each receive a salary of $2,000 per annum and no more."
Mr. ALLEN, of Putnam, made an ineffectual motion to amend the amendment by making the salary of circuit judges $1,800.
Mr. FAULKNER made an ineffectual motion to add that the judges of the supreme court shall receive a salary of $3,000.
The amendment [Mr. Osborn's] was agreed to.
Mr. WATSON moved to amend by providing that this section shall not apply to any judge who has been elected and commissioned.
Mr. REED thought the amendment reducing the salaries of judges should not apply to such as have been elected and commissioned, but have not yet qualified and entered upon the discharge of their official duties. Of these there are only five. All others who were elected last October have qualified and are exempted from the operation of any law that may be enacted, by the constitutional provision which does not permit a decrease of their salary during their continuance in office. If the bill as amended shall become a law, there will be in the State 38 circuit judges on a salary of $2,500 each, and five on a salary of $2,000. It is an unjust discrimination to secure a paltry saving.
The amendment [Mr. Watson's] was rejected.
Mr. STEVENS moved to strike out $100 and insert $70 for each 1,000 inhabitants in each county with a population over 15,000--as to the salary of County Auditor.
Mr. SHANKS made an ineffectual motion to amend the amendment by making it $125 for each 1,000 inhabitants in excess of 15,000.
Mr. Stevens' amendment was rejected by yeas 28, nays 61.
Mr. DAILEY moved to amend by adding "and $100 and no more shall be allowed for making all reports required by law to the Auditor of State in any one year,"
The amendment was agreed to.
Mr. VANPELT moved to strike out one-quarter of one per cent. and insert one-half of one per cent. for the management of the permanent school fund.
Mr. WILLARD moved to amend by making it three-quarters of one per cent. The amendment to the amendment was agreed to, and the amendment as amended was rejected by yeas 37, nays 53.
Mr. OVERMEYER moved to make it one half of one per cent, which, was agreed to by yeas 72, nays 22.
Mr. CUNN1NGHAM moved that the Auditor shall be allowed $2.50 per day for attendance on county assessors, which motion was laid on the table.
Mr. SLEETH moved to amend by providing that no proceedings in highways, ditches and turnpikes shall be charged against the county, which was adopted.
Mr. WATSON moved to amend that Auditors shall furnish at their own expense all stationery, except that for the especial use of the county, which was adopted.
Mr. Overmeyer moved to amend by making the salary of County Treasurers $1,000 instead of $750, and for the collection of delinquent taxes 5 per cent. instead of 3 per centum.
A division of the question was demanded, and the first part, making the salary $1,000, was agreed to, and the second division, allowing 5 instead of 3 per centum for the collection of delinquent taxes, was rejected by--yeas 41, nays 47.
Mr. HANDY made an ineffectual motion to strike out 1/2 per cent. and insert one per centum for the first $100,000 of taxes by them collected--yeas 27, nays 57.
On motion by Mr. OVERMEYER an amendment was adopted preventing sheriff's from drawing any pay from the State for the transportation of prisoners.
On motion by Mr. SAINT sheriff's are required to furnish all their stationery except dockets, fee books, records, record books and ink.
On motion by Mr. KIRKPATRICK the per diem of County Commissioners was reduced from $4 to $3.
On motion by Mr. SLEETH the fee of the prosecuting attorney, upon forfeited recognizance, was reduced from $10 to $5, and when prosecuted, to find judgment against defendant from 10 to 5 cents on money collected.
Mr. OVERMEYER moved to reconsider the vote by which the pay of county commissioners was reduced to $3.00 per day.
Mr. EDWINS moved to lay the motion to reconsider on the table, which was agreed to by--yeas 45, nays 38.
And then the House adjourned.
Mr. REEVE introduced a bill [S. 442] supplemental to the general election acts--relating to general elections to beheld in 1880--if the proposed constitutional amendment No. 3 be ratified by the people. The general election of October 1880, shall be held on the first Tuesday after the first Monday in November, 18Si). On his further motion the constitutional rule was dispensed with--yeas 39, nays 4--the lull considered as engrossed and read the second time.
Mr. HARRIS raised a constitutional objection to the wording of the bill--its execution
being dependent upon a condition. He moved its reference to the
Mr. REEVE replied to this objection; consenting to the reference.
The motion to refer was agreed to.
The wet land drainage bill [S.17--Mr. Kent's as fully described in these reports of February 10. a. m. and 20, p. m.] was read the third time.
Mr. REEVE on a former occasion sought to point out serious objections to this bill. While he was absent on a mournful duty the bill was passed to the third reading. The provisions of the bill are so unprecedently vicious in character, he desired in a brief manner to call attention to the fact that this class of legislation is in the direction of transferring to individuals the right of eminent domain. This bill in an absolute and overwhelming degree would transfer to an irresponsible individual rights over eminent domain that no Czar or Emperor dare exercise. It would give to an irresponsible man absolute control over anybody's land at any time of the year, make his own expenses as he pleases, and lie shall be reimbursed. In full, his assessments being a perpetual lien on the lands till paid; the ditch may cost five times what the land is worth, and the land is to be sold if the assessments are not paid in 10 days. He is legislator, judge and sheriff; he declares the law, he expounds it and he executes; so there is nothing to appeal' from, and there is no provision made to contest these proceedings. The bill provides for 12 feet fall to the mile. This bill is got up for Clinton county and the counties adjoining. To transfer a power, the State can not and does not exercise, to an irresponsible individual, is something too preposterous to be seriously considered.
Mr. KENT insisted the senator from Marshall had certainly misunderstood the bill. The 12 foot fall is not made obligatory-the fail can not be made to exceed 12 feet per mile. Every State in the Union has drainage laws, and almost ever since the organization of the State there have been drainage laws on our statute books, under which vast tracts of marshy land formerly worthless, have been made useful; and many thousand acres are yet remaining in need of some such measure as this. This bill may not be perfect, but, as the senator himself has said, it is 100 per cent batter than any former law on this subject. The senator says this bill gives to an individual the exercise of the right of eminent domain, which Mr. K. denied. Laws of this kind exist in all the States, and no supreme court has decided against them. This is a good bill and it ought to pass.
Mr. FOSTER demanded the previous question, which was seconded by the Senate, and under its operation the bill passed the Senate by--yeas 40, nays 5.
Mr. URMSTON explaining: He was not satisfied with the bill, and had much doubt as to its constitutionality, but believing it much better than any law on the statute books, would vote "aye."
On motion by Mr. FOSTER, his bill [S. 103] to authorize cities to construct water works, was taken up, with a majority report recommending sundry amendments, and a minority report restricting the issue of bonds by cities or towns whose indebtedness exceeds 4 per cent. on amount of taxables, etc., otherwise concurring with the majority.
Mr. URMSTON moved the adoption of the minority report, giving reasons therefor.
Mr. FOSTER said if the minority report be adopted Fort Wayne would be cut off from the
provisions of this bill. He appealed to the Senate for a fair show in this matter,
hoping
Mr. MENZIES objected to allowing a town to be burdened with a debt of $4 on the $100 to increase its indebtedness, and, therefore, favored the minority report. Such a provision as is contemplated in the majority report would bring commercial paralysis and subsequent death to any community. He saw no limit to the bonds authorized to be issued by this bill, which comes here in the specious guise of general legislation, but is in reality a measure specially desired by the city of Fort Wayne.
Mr. REEVE: Even if Fort Wayne has an indebtedness of four and a half per cent., her citizens should still be the judges as to whether any more tax shall be levied or not. He favored the bill if it sufficiently guards the owners of artificial works. Unless this bill is passed, no city can thereafter construct water-works, if the constitutional amendment should be ratified by the people.
Mr. WOOD counselled caution in the matter of authorizing cities and towns to issue bonds, so many such corporations being now largely in debt. Conferring such great power on trustees and common councils is very dangerous proceedings. Such power should be curtailed; restrict the indebtedness, let the tax-payer be heard and he would favor the bill.
Mr. WINTERBOTHAM moved to amend the minority report by striking out "4" and inserting "2" per cent. in lieu. He believed no town should be allowed to create an indebtedness above two per cent of its taxables.
The amendment was rejected by yeas 13, nays 26.
Mr. FOSTER again appealed to senators to favor Ins city of Fort Wayne by voting against the minority report.
Mr. REEVE moved to strike from the minority report so much as refers to four per cent., which, under the operations of the previous question demanded by Mr. FOSTER was agreed to--yeas 24, nays 21.
The minority report as amended was adopted.
Mr. REEVE moved to amend by a provision protecting artificial water works from condemnation without consent of the owner.
Then came the recess till 2 o'clock.
The amendment was agreed to.
Mr. DICE moved an amendment requiring the affirmative vote of a majority before the water works shall be commenced.
Mr. REEVE moved a substitute for this amendment, requiring a petition of three-fifths in value of taxable property. He said it is not right to allow a floating voter, who contributes nothing, to impose taxes upon free-holders.
Mr. URMSTON hoped no senator would vote to accommodate one city, when by that vote many others may be ruined. He favored the substitute.
Mr. FOSTER, opposed the substitute, but was willing to adopt the amendment.
Mr. DICE opposed the substitute for his amendment, believing it would disfranchise a large number of voters, and believing it also impracticable.
The substitute was rejected upon a division--yeas 17, nays 23.
The amendment was agreed to.
Mr. SARNIGHAUSEN moved to add to the section the words: "under the provisions of the present law regulating the sale of bonds," etc.
Mr. FOSTER opposed the amendment.
The amendment was agreed to.
Mr. WIER made an ineffectual motion to amend by striking from the bill the words "incorporated towns."
On motion by Mr. SARNIGHAUSEN secs. 10,14 and 15 were amended by inserting a proviso that contracts shall be ratified by the Council. The bill as amended was passed the second reading by--yeas 37, nays 10.
Mr. REEVE explaining: Insomuch as this bill provides that persons who are unable to pay anything shall be permitted to vote to tax owners of property, he should vote "no."
Mr. STREIGHT explaining: Believing there is great danger in allowing corporations to go in debt, but believing there may be an exception made in cases of water works. On this bill he should vote "aye."
Mr. URMSTON explaining: Having done what he could to amend the bill, it still lacking in guards about trustees of cities and towns, he should have to vote "no."
On motion by Mr. FOSTER, the constitutional rule was dispensed with by--yeas 42, nays 4--the bill considered engrossed, read the third time, and passed the Senate by--yeas 32, nays 11.
On motion by Mr. FOWLER, the bill [H. R. 7, see these reports February 25, p. m.]regulating the working of coal mines, was read the third time.
Mr. STREIGHT hoped due consideration will be given to this bill, and desired that senators should be careful in putting such great power, as is proposed in this bill, in the hands of such gangs as have recently enacted scenes as the State should never see again. It is not safe to place the coal mining interests of the State in the control of this class of men. Experience in Pennsylvania shows that element should be controlled and not placed in a position to control. Their murderous course has placed them in antagonism to all law. But who is asking for this kind of enactments? Not the producers of coal or the proprietors of coal mines, but the miners themselves. If proper machinery is not used, the owners should be compelled to procure proper machinery and to keep their mines properly ventilated. If the friends of the miner want legislation for their protection inside of the mines, there should also be laws made to protect the miner outside of the mine, and the operators' property should be protected. This bill is a one-sided affair, not calculated to reach proper ends; it represents the element that not only destroyed property in Clay county, but murdered men there; and neglects to do any tiling for anybody else. He regarded this as the worst and most dangerous bill ever presented to the General Assembly.
Mr. TREAT disagreed with the senator [Mr. Streight] about the construction of the section of the bill referring to the inspection of the mines. The design of the bill is humanitarian--it is intended to protect the workmen who delve in the bowels of the earth. In some of the mining States there are statutes more stringent than this. These men look to the strong arm of the law for protection, and they ought not to be permitted to look in vain. If the owner can not afford ventilation and outlets sufficient for the safety of his hands, he ought not to work his mine. As such legislation is necessary in al1 mining States, in behalf of thousands of men in this State engaged in mining, he desired to see protection extended to them. He favored the bill, and should vote for it, unless receiving more light than is now in his possession from its opponents. Men in illy ventilated shafts work in partial torture, and as a question of health and life he favored this measure.
Mr. REEVE repealed his assertion made the other day, that no such inconsistent
measure could be found in any similar act on the stat-[ute]
Mr. KENT would favor a bill for the proper ventilating of coal mines, but for this measure he could not vote. It places coal miners probably a member of a communistic order in charge of the entire mining interests of the State, embracing, possibly, a valuation of $50,000,000. He opposed placing this vast interest in the hands of men in league with the miners themselves. There are provisions in this bill unjust and improper. The bill goes far beyond any other mining laws in other States. He believed it will do the miners but little good, and that it would increase the price of coal 25 per cent.
Mr. WOOD. It is asserted that this is a bill in the interest of the Molly Maguires, but no argument is advanced to prove that statement. If this bill makes the business or mining more safe it will make coal cheaper. Why do all mining States have bills of this kind? Simply to protect the miners. As he understood the bill it was intended, also, to keep the laborer from being swindled. This bill is not a perfect one, out as its great purpose is to protect mines and the miners, he was willing to forego small objections and support the bill.
Mr. HEFRON regarded the bill, in its general scope and purpose, as worthy of acceptance as it stands. It throws around the miner the safety and protection it should, without imposing greater burdens than it ought to upon the owner of the mines. He defied senators to point out a single feature, word or syllable in this bill that will break up the mining interest in the bill, as has been charged. He favored doing what is right and. just and proper as between the miner and the operator, and declared it to be the duty of this Legislature, in view of recent disasters in the mines, to pass some act to protect the interest of the miners.
Mr. FOWLER conceded this to be a very important bill, affecting as it does the lives of thousands of miners, and property of the value of probably $50,000,000 or more. He combatted the statements that this bill was in the interests of communists;he would object to anything of that kind most seriously. The operators have moved heaven and earth to defeat this bill in this body every time it has passed the other House; and bills similar to this have passed the other House four times in the past few years. It is worse than pettifogging to talk about a good mining law raising the price of coal. Provisions are put in this bill to protect small mines. It does not operate on any mine from which less than 15,000 square yards of coal are mined. Had this bill become a law two years ago the eight lives recently lost in the Sullivan county mines would have been saved.
Mr. HEILMAN denied the charge of being on the side of capital as agaist labor; on the contrary, he insisted that he was on the side of the workingman, being himself a worker as many hours in the day as any other man in the State. Landing in this State without a dollar, what he owns he made as a business man.
Under the operation of the previous question, demanded by Mr. VIEHE, the bill was passed by--yeas 28, nays 14.
Pending the roll call--
Mr. HART, explaining: This bill is not just the bill he desired, but as the best thing that could be got, he should vote "aye."
Mr. KENT, explaining: He would be glad to vote for a fair mining bill, but inasmuch as opportunity for amendments were cut off, he could not vote for this one.
Mr. REEVE, explaining: By a fair understanding this bill was not to be considered as read the second time when last before the Senate, and inasmuch as amendments were cut off by win at he considered a trick, he should vote "no."
Mr. SHIRK explaining: Was not exactly suited with this bill, and would like to see amendments made to it; but inasmuch as it is the best thing that can be got, he would vote "aye."
Mr. STREIGHT explaining: Was unable to vote for this bill, as it contains no provision for the appointment of impartial and intelligent inspectors.
Mr. TAYLOR explaining: Did not wish to be understood as against a proper mining bill, but there are some provisions in this one so adverse to good judgment that he could not vote for it.
Mr. TREAT stated he was paired with the senator from Elkhart [Mr. Davenport] on this question.
And so the bill passed.
Mr. OLDS, from the special committee appointed to investigate the Soldiers' Orphans' Home at Knightstown, submitted an extended report concluding with a resolution instructing the attorney-general to take such steps in regard to recovering back to the State the extra per diem paid said trustees (George Sanford, of Crown Point, $222. Ellison Williams, of Knightstown,$222, and William Hannaman, of Indianapolis, $444) as in his opinion is just.
On motion of Mr. WOOLLEN, the report was made the special order for the morning hour to-morrow.
And then the Senate adjourned.
Yesterday's journal was not read.
Mr. WORKS offered the following:
Whereas, the statute authorizing the auditor of State to collect certain fees from foreign insurance companies, allows him to retain for his services 25 percent, thereof, and
Whereas, there is no provision of law by which the action of such auditor, in collecting and paying over such fees can be inquired into by any other officer, and
Whereas, It is being charged that the predecessor of the present incumbent of said office has charged exorbitant and illegal fees in connection with such foreign insurance companies, and has failed to account to the State for moneys collected, and
Whereas, It is believed there is no law authorizing such auditor to charge any fees for services rendered by him in connection with the land department of such office, and
Whereas, It has been charged that the predecessor of the present incumbent has charged fees for his services in connection with said, department, in violation of law, and has been guilty of other violations of duty as such auditor; therefore
Resolved, That a committee of five be appointed to investigate the affairs of said office during the term of office of the predecessor of the present incumbent, and that they be instructed to inquire into all the business of the office, but particularly whether any fees, not authorized by law, have been charged, and the amount of fees collected and received by such auditor during his office, and that the committee report fully to this House.
Resolved, That the committee shall have full and free access to any and all books
and papers
Resolved, That such committee shall have power to send for persons and papers, and to do any other acts necessary to a full and fair investigation of said office.
The SPEAKER made the committee to consist of Messrs. Works, Sleeth, Huthsteiner, Overmeyer, and Dailey.
Mr. GORDON moved to amend the resolution so as to allow the committee to sit during the recess, and report to the next general assembly.
Mr. OVERMEYER and Mr. SLEETH thought the investigation should be made at once and reported to this House.
Mr. DRAKE said he thought this matter ought to have been set on foot some time ago.
Mr. LEHMAN said he did not believe any good could come of such an investigation.
The amendment was rejected, and the resolution adopted.
The House proceeded to the unfinished business at the adjournment last night--the amendment striking out $5 and inserting $1.50 [Mr. Overmeyer's] to the amendment [Mr. Faulkner's] to the fee and salary bill, fixing the per diem of member of the General Assembly at $5.
Mr. Overmeyer's amendment was laid on the table--yeas 56, nays 37.
Mr. OSBORNE of Elkhart, moved to amend by reducing the mileage from eight to four cents per mile, which was accepted.
Mr. LEHMAN moved an amendment that no mileage be allowed to any member holding a pass, which was also accepted.
The amendment was then adopted by--yeas 73, nays 18.
Mr. GORDON moved ineffectually--yeas 42, nays 50--for a reconsideration for the vote by which the House refused to allow the attorney general a clerk at $1,500.
Mr. OVERMEYER moved to amend the bill by adding that township trustees shall not hereafter levy the tax heretofore known as "township tax," and that they shall be paid for all their services out of the county treasury, upon itemized and sworn statements.
Mr. WORKS moved to amend so that the trustee shall be paid out of his own township fund.
Mr. BAKER moved ineffectually to lay both amendments on the table--yeas 34, nays 47.
Mr. OVERMEYER said he did not think the amendment to the amendment ought to be adopted, because he did not see any practical way to carry out its provisions.
Mr. TULLEY thought the amendment to the amendment should prevail. He did not think they county townships ought to be taxed for city trustee expenses.
Mr. WILLARD demanded the previous question on the pending amendments and engrossment of the bills, which demand was sustained by--yeas 61, nays 28.
The amendment to the amendment was rejected, to amendment adopted and the bill was ordered engrossed.
Mr. EDWINS, chairman of the
Mr. WIMMER said he hoped that the adverse report of the committee would not be concurred in on the bill H. R. 373, concerning trespassing animals, and on his motion the report was laid on the table and the bill ordered engrossed.
Mr. SCHWEITZER said: This bill H. R., 576, allows notaries public the right to perform the marriage ceremony, and on his motion the report was laid on the table, and the bill ordered engrossed.
Mr. EDWINS said: that in the early part of the session he had introduced a bill on the same subject, with the bills S. 9 and 136, by request, but he was opposed to any such measure unless the unclaimed rich, as well as the unclaimed poor bodies were subject to the provisions of this bill, and would vote against them on their passage.
Mr. VAN VALZEH, chairman of the
Mr. THAYER thought the report of the committee ought not to be concurred in, and in view of the destruction of life consequent upon engines being run by incompetent persons, this Legislatures ought to do something in this direction. On his motion the report was laid on the table and the bill ordered engrossed.
Mr. BAKER, chairman of the
On the motion of Mr. CONNER the report of the committee on the bill [H. R. 21] to abolish the office of county assessor was laid on the table and the bill ordered engrossed.
On the motion of Mr. JOHNSON the report of the committee on the bill [H. R. 209] was laid on the table and the bill ordered engrossed.
Mr. SHANKS said he hoped the report of the committee on the bill H. R. 262 would not be concurred in. On his motion the report was laid on the table and the bill ordered engrossed.
Mr. SLEETH hoped the House would not concur in the adverse report of the committee on the bill [H. R. 325] regulating repairing and the erection of bridges. On his motion the report was laid on the table and the bill ordered engrossed.
Mr. DALTON introduced a bill [H. R. 637] for aid in the construction of the new State House. Appropriating $1,000,000.
Mr. ALLEN, of Putnam, introduced a bill, [H. R. 638] to regulate the proceedings of the State House Commissioners.
The constitutional rule was suspended, the bill severally read the second time by title
only and referred to the
Mr. HANDY opposed concurrence in the report of the committee on the bill H. R. 469. On this motion the report was laid on the table and the bill ordered engrossed.
Mr. Handy, from the
The House took a recess until 2 o'clock.
Mr. HUMPHREY presented the credentials of O. E. FLEMING, representative from the county of Allen.
Mr. FLEMING received the oath of office at
Mr. DAVIDSON, chairman of the committee on agriculture, returned the following bills with favorable recommendations thereon: H. R. 605, 488, 530, and Senate bill 303.
Mr. JOHNSON, from the same committee, returned the bill H. R. 531, recommending passage.
Mr. BRIGGS, from the
These reports were concurred in and the bills severally ordered engrossed.
Mr. SCHOLL, from the same committee, returned the bill [H. R. 100], to allow insane persons to send letters by mail, recommending indefinite postponement. He said the committee saw no reason why such a bill should become a law. He thought it would have many very bad effects. It was the unanimous opinion of the committee that this bill should not become a law. In cases of monomaniacs, when it is necessary that the patient should be cut off entirely from the matters which disturb his mind, how are you going to effect a cure when the outsiders can continue to irritate the mind of the patient, with no power to prevent it? A man wandering in delirium needs to be guarded as little child. The Insane Hospital is one of the most important institutions of our State. The superintendent, if he is qualified, should have absolute and complete control of his patients.
Mr. GORDON said he knew the tenacity of doctors to hold on to power. Men and women who are in the way of some one's business, may be a mere sham trial, be hustled away and confined in the Insane Asylum without a fair trial. He said it was no more than fair to allow them to write their letters and put them in the letter box without interruption. He moved to lay the report upon the table, which was agreed to, and the bill was ordered engrossed.
Mr. FAULKNER, chairman of the
Mr. ARNOLD, of Blackford, submitted a minority report on the bill with amendments, and when so amended recommending passage.
The minority report, was, under the operation of the previous question, rejected--yeas 43, nays 53.
The majority report was then concurred in.
Mr. FAULKNER returned the bill [H. R. 315] regulating the sale of intoxicating liquors, with a recommendation that the bill lie on the table.
Mr. HUBBARD submitted a minority report with amendments, and, when so amended, recommended its passage.
Mr. BRIGGS moved to lay the minority report on the table, which was rejected by yeas 45, nays 46.
Mr. SAINT said the temperance question was no hobby of his. He hoped, in the consideration of this bill, there would be no party lines drawn. He had been in receipt of letters daily, asking whether the members of this Legislature dared to come to the rescue of the people, and pass such a law as they stand in need of. This bill allows a majority of the citizens in any township to say whether they will license the sale of intoxicating liquors within their midst.
Under the operation of the previous question the House rejected the report of the minority by--yeas 46, nays 48.
Pending the call--
Mr. TAYLOR of Daviess, explaining, said as a matter of principle he was opposed to all sumptuary laws, and that no law can be sustained unless it meets the approbation of the people. Whenever we pass a sumptuary law the people will evade it. He would yield to no gentleman in his advocacy of temperance in the family an in the social relations of life, but because this was a sumptuary law he voted "no."
Mr. THAYER, explaining, said that he took pleasure in giving this public expression to his sentiments. He voted "aye."
The report of the majority of the committee was then concurred in, and the bill was laid on the table.
The bill [H. R. 359] from the same committee recommending its passage. The report was concurred in.
Also the bill H. R. 415, from the same committee with a recommendation that the bill lie upon the table.
On motion by Mr. MITCHELL the report of the committee was laid upon the table--affirmative 42, negative 39.
Mr. MARCH had hoped that this House would have passed a local option law, but as they had refused to do it, he now hoped as this law was better than the one we are now operating under, we may have this law.
Mr. SHANKS said he was glad to notice that the word "quart" was not in this bill. Heretofore, any one could sell a quart at a time, and he was glad to live to see the time when this objectionable quart was stricken out.
Mr. TAYLOR of Daviess, from the
Mr. HANDY, from the
Mr. Humphreys, from the
Mr. HESS moved to lay this report upon the table, which was agreed to by yeas 65, nays 24, and on his motion the bill was indefinitely postponed.
The
Mr. ENGLISH, chairman of the
Mr. ALLEN, of Putnam, chairman of the
Mr. ALLEN, of Putnam, returned the bill S. 139 without any report thereon.
Mr. STUCKER, chairman of the
Mr. KESTER moved to lay on the table the report on the bill H. R. 265, which was agreed on, and the bill was ordered engrossed.
The bill H. R. 554, adversely reported on, was ordered engrossed.
Mr. HUTHSEINER, chairman of the
Mr. LINDLEY, from the
On the motion of Mr. WILLARD, the report and bill were laid on the table.
Also, the bill H. R. 284 and Senate bills 365 and 47, with favorable reports.
Mr. CALDWELL, chairman of the
Mr. ENGLISH, from the same committee, returned the bill H. R. 143, recommending that it lie on the table.
Mr. DALTON, chairman of the
Mr. EDWINS, chairman of the
The report was rejected, and the bill was laid upon the table.
Then the House adjourned.
Prayer by Rev. URBAN C. BREWER.
On motion by Mr. HARRIS the reading of the minutes was dispensed, with and the House amendments to his prisoner's work bill [S. 68] were read and concurred in.
On motion by Mr. DICE the Senate proceeded to the consideration of Senate bills on the third reading.
The non-resident garnishee bill [S. 56--Mr. Kahlo's, fully described in these reports February 24, a. m.] was read the third time and passed the Senate by yeas 39, nays 1.
The bill [S. 57--Mr. Harris'] authorizing county commissioners to erect workhouses, was read the third time, and passed by yeas 47, nays 1.
The bill [S. 61--Mr. Coffey's--see these reports February 24, p. m.] concerning deputy sheriffs, was read the third time, and passed by yeas 43, nays 3.
Mr. REEVE explaining his negative vote by declaring this bill would increase the number of bailiff's, which in almost every court are now too numerous.
The bill [S. 94--Mr. Wood's] limiting the height of hedge fences to six feet was read the third time.
Mr. STREIGHT regarded it as very detrimental to compel the cutting down of hedges in some cases, especially on the west side of fields in exposed places and on the prairies.
Mr. WOOD explained the shade from these high hedges kept the roads in bad condition by excluding the sun's rays, and that these high fences obstructed the view of the country.
Mr. KRAMER favored the bill regarding it an imposition on the people to allow hedges to grow higher than six feet.
The bill failed by yeas 20, nays 23.
The bill [S. 122--Mr. Shaffer's] to provide for repairs on free turnpike roads was read the third time.
Mr. SHAFFER explained that the important provisions of this bill embrace regulations for the repair of free gravel roads, and unless some such measures are passed thousands of dollars expended on such roads by the tax payers residing thereon will be lost.
The bill passed by yeas 33, nays 10.
The bill [S. 21--Mr. Davenport's] for the establishment of courts in cities of 6,000 inhabitants, was read the second time and ordered engrossed.
The bill [S. 169--Mr. Hart's] prohibiting the secreting, etc., of mortgaged goods was read the third time and passed by yeas 38, nays 4.
The bill [S. 175--Mr. Sarnighausen's--see these reports Feb. 21, p. m.] for the appointment of county superintendents of schools by the township trustees was read the third time.
Mr. SARNIGHAUSEN declared this bill would make the office more efficient, and that some senators who were opposed to it on the second reading were now in favor of its beneficent provisions.
Mr. BENZ was in favor of abolishing the office of county school superintendent altogether; the State got along well enough under the old law, which was a very good one, and therefore he opposed this bill.
The bill passed the Senate by yeas 33, nays 7.
The bill [S. 176--Mr. Traylor's] to legalize the acts of the trustees of the town of Jasper was read the third time and passed by yeas 36, nays 1.
The bill [S. 258--Mr. Sarnighausen's] to legalize the acts of local authorities in annexing certain territory to Fort Wayne was read the third time and passed by yeas 36, nays 2.
The bill [S. 271--Mr. Comstock's; see these reports of February 22, a. m.] to enlarge the jurisdiction or mayors of cities and justices of the peace, was read the third time.
Mr. COMSTOCK explained the bill was to economize the time of criminal and circuit courts by doing away with the necessity of a trial in said courts of causes which may be punished by imprisonment in the county jail.
Mr. KENT opposed the bill. It would be unsafe to place such power in the hands of
justices of the peace. The jury has the benefit of argument by learned counsel, and also
instructions of the court, thus educating their minds so as properly to apply the law to
the facts. Among a liberty-loving people we can not
Mr. REEVE also opposed the bill, Mr. TRAYLOR believed it only a measure to allow justices of the peace to fill our jails with poor men.
Mr. KRAMER thought it a good bill and a measure of economy.
Mr. OLDS regarded this bill as against the interests of reform and economy. It would create a greater expense than under the present practice. It is not right to talk about economy when liberty is at stake. The bill is so unjust it ought not to receive any where near a majority of votes favorable to its passage.
Mr. COMSTOCK: Senators have not carefully considered this bill, or they have forgotten some of the principles of the law. The purpose of the bill is not to deprive any one of a fair and impartial trial, either by the justice, or by a jury. As a matter of dollars and cents, this bill was not urged; that would be too trivial an argument where liberty of the person is involved.
Mr. GRUBBS believed the bill wrong in principle. No felony is, or can be trivial. This crime is an important one, and one involving as many principles of law as the higher offences. This bill proposed to place such cases before a court in 99 cases out of 100 utterly incompetent, and having no ability to comprehend the case in its proper bearings.
Mr. FOWLER at first favored this bill, but after examination he could not vote for it while containing the provision allowing justices jurisdiction over felony cases.
Mr. TRAYLOR was well satisfied this bill would prove a denial of justice to many parties charged with crime.
The bill passed the Senate by--yeas 27, nays 19.
The bill [S. 267--Mr. Olds'] to amend section 1 of the act of March 14, 1867, amending section 561 of the general practice act, was read the third time.
Mr. OLDS explained: The bill provides that appeals, when taken to the supreme court, in cases where the amount in controversy is under $50,the law of 1867 shall not apply where the validity of any city ordinances is involved.
The bill passed by--yeas 39, nays 5.
Mr. MENZIES offered a resolution authorizing the governor to appoint some competent
person to codify the insurance laws, at a cost not to exceed $100, which was referred to
the
And then came the recess till 2 o'clock.
The bill [S. 196--Mr. Streight's--see these reports, Feb. 21, p. m.] regulating tolls on roads located on beds ceded by the United States to this State, was read the third time.
Mr. STREIGHT gave a history of the building of the roads affected by his bill: They were originally constructed in every particular by the general Government and ceded to this State; costing the present owners but a very small sum, and they should be compelled to desist from bleeding the people as shamefully as they do, by the restrictions in this bill which allows them 10 per cent. profit on their vestments, over and above the necessary repairs and cost of collecting toll.
Mr. REEVE: This bill seems to apply to one road and to no other. It allows pay for expenses, but does not allow anything for services of the owner or for the capital invested. He could not see where any advantage would accrue by the crippling of a little undertaking of this kind, nor why there should be $400 an hour spent to consider such a bill as this, when important legislation is awaiting action.
Mr. TRUSLER thought this bill should not pass. Where war is made against such roads it is generally made by those living on them. He was satisfied this bill is intended for but one particular road, and insisted that such kind of legislation is radically wrong.
Mr. HEFRON could see no injustice in the provisions of this bill. He favored its passage.
Mr. FOWLER regarded this bill as impracticable, and a very doubtful piece of legislation.
Mr. VIEHE also objected to the passage of the bill.
Mr. COMSTOOK gave reasons why he thought this bill ought not to pass.
Mr. BURRELL characterized this bill as proposing a species of class legislation that would transcend the constitutional limit.
The bill passed by--yeas 28, nays 17.
The bill [S. 297--Mr. Hefron's] to abolish the office of State geologist was read the third time.
Mr. REEVE: The State geologist has developed millions of dollars of property in this State that, but for this department, would be now unknown. It is about the only branch of the government that has been productive. By it wealth has been called here, and the attention of men of brains has been directed to the vast resources of the State. That which goes from the hands of the scientific department of the State receives respectful attention; where any other publication of the kind would be looked upon as a simple advertising venture. He trusted the State would save its credit by refusing to pass this bill.
Mr. STREIGHT: The development of our coal mines is largely due to the efforts of tho State geologist. Tile for floors had never been manufactured anywhere in the United States till it was commenced in this city, and this is due to the efforts of Prof. Cox; and we are not at the end of the investigations into the resources of the State. He opposed the passage of the bill.
Mr. KRAMER did not question but that the State geological department has achieved much for this State, but in these times he thought it imprudent to keep up this expense. It does not pay in the present depressed state of business and considering the heavy burden of taxation now oppressing the people of this State, he should vote for the abolishment of this expensive department.
Mr. SHAFFER thought this looked too much like legislating on a man's estate before his death. This office has not yet outlived its usefulness; and there is as much necessity for it in the 10 years to come as there has been in the 10 years past. He hoped this bill would not become a law.
Mr. WILSON was not much in love with this bill, nor would he object to such a geological department as senators opposed to the bill have pictured. This office has not met public expectation in developing the agricultural interests of the State. The geological reconnoisance of his own county was notoriously imperfect. He felt disposed to consent to the abolishment, for the time being, of this department which is doing so little good at present, and therefore would support the bill under consideration, though much preferring to see the property belonging to this office transferred, to Purdue University, than to see it go in the direction indicated in this bill.
Mr. TREAT did not desire the abolishment of this department: It has been the means of
bringing capital to the State, which has laid the foundation for her future
prosperity. When attention is called to the existence of coal mines or stone quarries,
or other under-
Mr. HEFRON did not maintain that the geological department has not been of great benefit to the State, but contended that, aside from the survey, the benefits have not been so very large. We are in possession of that survey, made in l873-4 or 5; but there having been no reports made since then, of what benefit has the office been to the people? All the good that has been derived from this office has already been secured, and it is now but a useless expense.
The bill failed to pass--yeas 23, nays 22.
The bill [S. 308--Mr. Kramer's--See these reports Feb. 22, p. m. ] to fix the rate for printing the delinquent tax list, was read the third time, and passed the Senate by yeas 34, nays 10.
The bill [S. 325--Mr. Heilman's] to amend the charter of the town of Evansville, was read the third time and passed by--yeas 40, nays 3.
Mr. HEILMAN explaining it was to authorize Evansville to aid in the construction of a bridge across the Ohio river.
The bill [S. 381--Mr. Traylor's--to provide for the publication of legal and official matters in newspapers, was read the third time and passed by--yeas 38, nays 1.
Mr. TRAYLOR explaining it was to allow the publication of legal notices in papers using patent outsides or insides, or where printed partly in German and partly in English.
The bill [S. 390--Mr. Reeve's--see these reports of Feb. 25, a. m.] to prevent certain live stock from running at large, was read the third time and failed to pass by--yeas 17, nays 23.
Mr. DICE and Mr. FOSTER thought the present law, if properly enforced, would afford ample protection.
On motion by Mr. STREIGHT, the bill [H. R.
637] appropriating $700,000 for the building of the new State House, to be drawn
in installments of $100,000, levying a tax of 2 per cent. for a State House fund,
authorizing the issuing of State House bonds, etc., was read the first time and
referred to the
On motion by Mr. BRISCOE, his fee and salary bill [S. 424] was read the first time.
On motion by Mr. KENT, the bill [H. R. 55] to legalize certain acts of the Board of Commissioners of Clinton county, was read the second time.
And then the Senate adjourned.
The minutes were not read.
Mr. CONNOR, from the majority of the select committee thereon, returned the bill [H. R. 22] to exempt property from execution, with amendments exempting $700 real estate and $300 personalty.
Mr. ALLEN of Putnam submitted a minority report, striking out all after the enacting clause and inserting new matter.
Mr. SHANKS said under the proposition of the majority if a man held land he was exempt $1,000 if not only $300.
Mr ALLEN, of Putnam, thought that every man should have an exemption of $1,000, giving the choice to elect as to whether it should all be in real estate or personal, or in both.
Mr. TULLEY said the object of the exemption was to attach men to the State, and incite them to make a permanent home. and it seemed to him one of the most laudable measures that could be passed.
Mr. WATSON said: The idea of a homestead is a principle that should be engrafted in our laws.
Mr. OWEN said: The minority report proposes to eliminate from the homestead bill its kernel: the idea that makes it commendable. Its purpose its to make permanent citizens. Lord Macauly predicted the policy of our Government would be a failure, and that the life of the nation would be menaced and finally taken by the floating population. Mr. O. had an abiding faith in the perpetuity of our institutions, but he believed that just as you multiply the little homes over our country, though they be humble ones, you multiply the safeguards of our Government. A homestead identifies the owner with the community and its interests.
Mr. JOHNSON said that men in the country and everywhere suppose that they are able to choose for themselves. They feel fully qualified to say whether they want their exemption in real or personal property. It would encourage men more to give them $1,000 and let them choose their own exemption then if you would exempt them $700 in realty and $300 in personalty.
Mr. MARCH said the object was to protect the careless and heedless by making the exemption part in real and part in personal
Mr. HANDY said there never has been such a demand for an exemption law in this State as now. He hoped that the majority report would be rejected, and the minority report concurred in.
Mr. DRAKE opposed a distinction between the man who holds real estate and the man who holds personalty.
Mr. ALLEN, of Putnam, would vote for the bill if the means were provided by which we could reach the $1,000 homestead.
The minority report was adopted, yeas 58, nays 36.
Mr. HUMPHREYS moved to strike out $1,000 and insert $500 which was rejected by yeas 43, nays 52.
Mr. WILLARD thought there should be some exemption to citizens not householders, and moved it be made $200.
On motion by Mr. WIMMER the amendment was laid on the table--yeas 47, nays 41.
The bill was ordered engrossed.
Mr. ALLEN, of Putnam, from the select committee thereon, returned the bill [H. R. 51] to abolish the office of county superintendent, with amendments.
MR. OWEN submitted a minority report, with a recommendation to indefinitely postpone.
Mr. STUCKER hoped the minority report would not be concurred in.
Mr. OVERMEYER thought we were not prepared now to abolish the office of county school superintendent. It is said that this office was expensive to the State. In 79 counties out of 92 it cost about $59,000. If you want to strike a blow at the entire school system abolish this office; but as for himself, he did not want to take such a backwards step.
Mr. OSBOURNE of Elkhart, said while the bill as presented by the minority report, in terms abolishes the office of county superintendent, it does not do so in fact, but only changes its name to school examiner. The 5th section provides that wherever in the present law the words county superintendent was used, it shall be held and deemed to mean and refer to the school examiner. The bill only cuts off the unlimited power of the superintendent to visit schools and charge a per diem therefor. It places the right to visit the schools and charge therefor in the discretion of the county commissioners within a certain limit fixed in the bill, and this is the only material change in the present law. It limits the cost of the office, and is in the interest of economy, without, in his opinion effecting the efficiency of the system.
Mr. MITCHELL did not know that he was
Mr. OWENS said since the establishment of the county school superintendent there had been rejected 6,600 applicants to teach. He wanted to try it for two years longer, and if then it did not pay he would be willing to abolish the office.
Mr. HESS thought it was well enough to keep up the office of superintendent.
Mr. ALLEN of Putnam said it would reduce the expenses at least $50,000.
The report of the minority was rejected by yeas 41, nays 52.
The majority report was then concurred in, and the bill ordered engrossed by yeas 51, nays 44.
Mr. OVERMEYER, from the
Mr. WILLARD submitted a minority report with amendments. He said that this bill even with amendments by the majority proposed to borrow $700,000 at 5 per cent. That this loan was to be paid in 1893. That the interest would amount to $100,000. This was to be taken out of the pockets of the people simply that contractors might buy their iron now while it was cheap. The measure was backed by the ring of politicians of Indianapolis who were interested in the rolling mill. There was now a surplus in the treasury of $600,O00. He was willing to appropriate $250,000 of this to the State House in each year and this with the 2 per cent. levy would make in the next two years $800,000. This would not satisfy the "ring" because it would not pay $350,000 for the iron. This bill was adding infamy to infamy. After the extra session called to pass the State House bill; after the bad faith with architects; after the unfair award, we are still to tax the people $400,000 more in order that contractors may buy their iron at a large profit. The proposition is simply infamous and that record will ruin any man voting for it. Mr. Willard continued in the same strain for 15 minutes.
Mr. OVERMEYER: This is purely a financial proposition. The bill provided for an appropriation of $1,000,000 for the building of the State House during the years 1879 and 1880, which the committee cut down to $700,000. The reports from the State treasury since October 31, 1877, show there has been an average cash balance of more than $500,000, and on February 25,1878, there was $633,000. Under our present tax levy and appropriations these cash balances will continue. Our appropriation will do little more than exhaust the large balance in the treasury, and we ought to be willing to set this balance afloat among the people in the erection of the State House. We also propose that the proceeds of the tax levies for 1878 and 1879 shall go into the State House fund. This will produce $150,000 in each of the years or $300,000 with $700,000 making $1,000,000. We provide also that the State officers shall be allowed to borrow money only when the cash balances in the treasury shad have been reduced below the sum of $100,000, and then only $100,000 shall be borrowed, and this may be repeated only until the debt so created shall have reached the sum of $500,000, and no more.
Thus it will be seen that while we provide ample means for the State House enterprise we grant but small opportunity for running the State in debt. The gist of the matter is that we apply the large balances now and hereafter to be in the treasury to the building of the State House. It is not likely that the State officers will be obliged to use, during the next two years, the full power to borrow that we grant in this bill limited as that power is; and if it should become necessary to use the full power, by reason of the exhaustion of the balances in the treasury, then such full power is exhausted when $500.000 are borrowed. The money so borrowed is to be represented by bonds bearing interest not to exceed five per cent., and redeemable at the pleasure of the State after five years. Thus we can provide the money for the building of the State House to the extent of $1,000,000 for the years 1879-80, and at the same time we provide that the temporary debt of the State shall not be increased beyond the sum of $500,000. It is not likely the temporary debt will be increased near that amount, but we thought it unsafe to fix the limit at less than that. There is no question as to whether the judgment of the State House board has been in all things correct. It is our duty now to provide means for building the new State House. This we should do in such a way as to be just to the people, the contractors and the House board.
The minority report was rejected--yeas 24, nays 69.
The majority report was concurred in.
On the motion of Mr. OVERMEYER, the bill was considered engrossed, read the third time, and passed by--yeas 70, nays 22.
The
Mr. HEROD said as a mere matter of business, he was in favor of taxing church property.
Mr. GORDON: Every dollar's worth of that kind exempt from taxation increases the tax upon other property. On account of equality, he was opposed to it.
Then came the recess till 2 o'clock.
Mr. THAYER: It is not the policy of this country to unite church and state. We ought to realize the fact that every fatherless child belongs to the State, and the influences of the church take them up and take them into Sunday-school and church, and make of them men and women. If that bill be passed he hoped it would be amended go as to apply to cities of 25,000 inhabitants.
Mr. CONNER said he would tell the gentlemen who are clamoring for the taxation of church property, that this question was settled against that theory more than a century ago in this country, and hence every State in the Union has provided in their organic law that such property might be exempted, and every State had, by law, provided for such exemption. There are over $15,000,000 invested in church property in this State, and there is an annual expenditure of over $2,000,000. Church people tax themselves for public good, and to tax their property, which yields no revenue to them, would be an attempt to kill the goose that lays the golden egg.
The report of the committee was concurred in by yeas 64, nays 26.
The
Mr. Herod made an ineffectual motion to reconsider the vote of yesterday appointing a committee to investigate the Auditor of State's office--yeas 47, nays 48.
On the motion of Mr. Barker two more were added to the investigating committee on the office of Auditor of State. The Speaker added Messrs. Osborne of Elkhart and Humphreys.
The House adjourned.
The minutes were not read.
Mr. WOOLLEN offered a resolution, which was adopted, authorizing the special committee to investigate the affairs of the benevolent and reformatory institutions to employ a short hand reporter. In the afternoon, on motion by Mr. FOSTER, this was changed to a concurrent resolution and adopted.
The LIEUTENANT GOVERNOR announced the special order--being the consideration of the bills [S. 84 and S. 278] to regulate the practice of medicine and surgery; and they were read the second time,
Mr. FOWLER moved to indefinitely postpone the bill, S. 278.
Mr. URMSTON knew of no bills on the files deserving more attention than this bill, S. 278. He sincerely hoped it would pass, as it far excels the bill, S.84.
Mr. WOOLLEN personally liked the bill [S. 278] which probably gave better protection to the people, but preferred to consider the bill [S. 84] because it provides for a State board of health, with a board of examiners in each congressional district, and would be more likely to pass the other House. He did not expect to get a perfect bill passed this session, but desired some such measure to become a law.
Mr. REEVE opposed the motion to postpone on the ground of public policy. The bill [S. 278] contains provisions of more importance than any other before the Senate, and if it becomes a law would save more lives in the State and do more good than all the legislation in the State for the last 10 years. One provision in this bill is worth a thousand bills like 84, and that is the clause which prohibits the vending of patent medicines in this State unless the formula be first submitted to the board of examiners and the board shall declare the opinion that such preparation will not injure the life or health if used as directed.
Mr. MENZlES saw no antagonism between the two bills. There were good features in S. 278, and no doubt it is a good bill, but senators should not now condemn in toto either of them. He opposed the motion to postpone. The people desire some legislation on this subject, being now overrun with quacks, especially in the southern portion, where they have appeared in large numbers after being recently run out of the States of Illinois and Kentucky.
Mr. GRUBBS favored the bill S. 278, believing that every school of medicine should be represented on the Board, and that the bill S. 278 is infinitely superior in many features to the other.
Mr. SHAFFER would be satisfied with either of these bills, but believed S. 278 was more perfect and would be more likely to meet the wants of the people, as well as the profession.
On motion of Mr. STREIGHT, the two bills were referred to a special committee of three, with instructions to report thereon Monday morning.
The LIEUTENANT GOVERNOR subsequently makes this committee to consist of Messrs. Peterson, Riley and Mercer.
On motion by Mr. BURRELL, the Senate proceeded to the consideration of House and Senate bills, on the second reading.
The bill H. R. 9, for regulating the setting up of corner stones in the public highways, was read the second time, with a committee report recommending its indefinite postponement. The report was concurred in, though resisted by Mr. WOOLLEN.
The bill [H. R. 12] to legalize the incorporation of Seymour, was read the second time.
Mr. FOWLER moved, ineffectually to amend by adding the words, "and all other towns."
The bill goes on the calendar of bills on the the third reading.
The bill [H. R. 14] to amend section one of the private cemetery incorporation act of March. 3,1875, was read the second time and passed to the third reading.
Mr. SARNIGHAUSEN moved that leave of absence be granted the senator from Porter [Mr. Wood] till Monday, on account of sickness in his family. After some humorous conversational debate thereon, the motion was agreed to by--yeas 36, nays 5.
Mr. BRISCOE moved for leave of absence
Mr. BENZ thereupon moved that all the senators be granted leave of absence till Monday week; which motion, being put amid much merriment, was declared by the Lieutenant Governor to be carried.
Mr. SHIRK offered a resolution, which was adopted, authorizing the appointment of a committee of three senators to act with a like House committee, to receive a committee of both Houses of the Ohio Legislature, coming here next Monday at 5:55 p. m., to visit the Benevolent Institutions of the State.
The LIEUTENANT GOVERNOR subsequently appointed as said committee on the part of the Senate Messrs. Shirk, Fowler and Streight.
The bill [H. R. 15] to legalize the election held in 1878 in the town of Edinburgh, was read the second time and passed to the third reading
The bill [H. R. 35] to amend sec. 64 of the Justices' act of June 9, 1852, was read the second time with a report recommending indefinite postponement.
Mr. Comstock opposed concurrence in the report.
Mr. REEVE thought such a bill should not pass--judgments are usually appealed from spite, and the cases where justice is done on the first trial are far more numerous than otherwise.
Mr. SHIRK favored this measure, thinking it much better to stop these small cases in the lower courts.
Mr. VIEHE referred to serious objections against the passage of the bill.
Mr. GRUBB8 explained that the bill provides there shall be no appeal in cases where the amount recovered is less than $20.
Mr. STREIGHT regarded the bill as a step in the right direction. It would relieve the upper courts to keep out of them these petty cases.
Mr. OLDS thought this bill ought not to pass. Proper testimony is very apt to be ruled out in Justices court, and in many other ways great hardships may grow out of such a bill if passed into a law.
Mr. KRAMER spoke in favor of the passage of this bill. It would have the effect of making men more careful in bringing the class of suits referred to. They would employ good attorneys, and litigation in small cases would more frequently be stopped in the justice's court.
Mr. TRAYLOR insisted that such a bill as this should not be passed, it being a practical denial of justice to poor men. This brings up a question as to whether a poor man shall have his rights as against the man of means, and under the operation of the provisions of this bill the rich man would win his suit in almost every case.
Mr. MENZIES opposed the cutting off all appeal in such cases, and so favored the report of the committee.
Mr. URMSTON, regarding this bill as limiting justices to cases under $20, should oppose the bill.
The report was concurred in by--yeas 23, nays 21.
Then came the recess till 2 o'clock.
On motion by Mr. POINDEXTER his bill [S. 374] to alter the charter of Clarkesville, was read the second time, with a committee report recommending that it lie on the table.
Mr. POINDEXTER moved to amend by a substitute, which was agreed to. He explained its object, and the bill was ordered engrossed for the third reading.
On motion by Mr. VIEHE the bill [S. 442--Mr. Reeve's) concerning general elections if the constitutional amendment, No. 3, be ratified by the people, was read the third time.
Mr. VIEHE said: The first section re-enacts the law of 1852, except that this bill provides the general election shall be held on the day fixed by the constitution instead of the second Tuesday in October. The second section provides that all acts required to be done at the October election shall be done at the elections held under the act, so that whether the constitutional amendment be ratified or not this bill will be of force and effect.
The bill passed the Senate by yeas 44, nays 0,
The bill [H. R. 24] regulating the indebtedness of counties having a population of over 20,000 ;and--
The bill [H. R. 56] defining the Twelfth, Tenth and Third judicial districts; and--
The bill [H. R. 122] supplemental to the city and Towns may negotiate bonds act of March 8, 1873; and--
The bill [H. R. 228] to enable the superintendent of public instruction and the auditor of Adams county to correct an error in the school accounts of said county; and--
The bill [H. R. 303] to legalize the acts of officers of Tell City, were read the second time and severally passed to the third reading.
The bill [H. R. 493] to prevent breechy animals from running at large, was read the second time, with a committee report that it lie on the table, which was concurred in.
The bill [S. 55--Mr. Garrigus'] to legalize the incorporation of the Kokomo Building association was read the second time and ordered engrossed for the third reading.
The bill [S. 59--Mr. Grubb's] to amend section 22 of the town incorporation act of June 11, 1852, was read the second time.
Mr. GRUBBS said the same bill was passed two years ago, bat the sections it amended being decided unconstitutional, this act became void. The only purpose is to give towns the right to regulate the sale of intoxicating liquors by requiring a license, and to establish police regulations in towns.
Mr. TRAYLOR moved to indefinitely postpone the bill.
Mr. VIEHE regarded this as a good bill. It allows towns to enforce an additional license fee for the retailing of intoxicating liquors.
Mr. REEVE explained further: When a man is entitled under the State laws to a license to retail intoxicating liquors, this bill will give the power to towns to restrain and regulate the vendor by charging an additional license not exceeding the amount required by the State law. The motion to indefinitely postpone the bill was rejected.
Mr. LEEPER offered an amendment limiting the tax to be imposed by towns to $50, which was rejected by--yeas 7, nays 27.
The bill [S. 62, Mr. Comstock's] to make stockholders liable for double the amount of their stock, was read the second time.
Mr. STREIGHT had seen the necessity of a bill of this character and hoped it would pass, The bill was ordered engrossed.
On motion by Mr. KENT the bill [F. 333, Mr. Donham's] to require the muzzling of dogs from 6 a. m, to 6 p. m., was read the second time and ordered engrossed.
The bill [S. 78, Mr. Shirk's, described in these reports of January 14] to amend section 364 of the general practice act, was read the second time and ordered engrossed.
The bill [S. 79, Mr. Reeve's, fully described in these reports of January 14] concerning contracts for public work, was read the second time and ordered engrossed.
The bill [S. 83, Mr. Leeper's] to limit civil jurisdiction of Justices to their own townships, was read the second time and ordered engrossed.
And then the Senate adjourned.
The minutes were not read.
Mr. OSBORNE, of Elkhart, felt impelled by a duty he owed to the State, to say that day after day this House had been filled with men lobbying for pet measures to the great annoyance of the House, and that voices in the lobby had voted to swell the yeas and nays in order to carry favorite measures. He offered a resolution that hereafter during this session no gentleman shall be allowed to remain on the floor of the House or within the cloak or anterooms, except members of the House or Senate, or the officers or employes thereof, or reporters or members of the press, and the doorkeeper is hereby instructed to strictly enforce this order.
Mr. SHANKS had not been troubled with this kind of a nightmare, and did not like to hear talk about members being directed here in their votes; nor would he admit that any man comes here as a moral trainer of this House.
Mr. DAILEY did not understand that this resolution intended to assert that any member had been corrupted, and was in favor of the resolutions. He said the hum of voices was so loud that no business could be done satisfactorily, because members, especially in the rear of the hall, could not hear.
The SPEAKER referred to a rule of the House which would correct these evils, and which should be enforced. It was time now for action, and not for talking. There was a large amount of business on his table to dispose of.
The
Mr HANDY submitted a minority report setting forth that inasmuch as a special committe had heretofore reported adversely upon the same claim, he was compelled to recommend that the claim be rejected.
On the motion of Mr. DAILY the claim and report were laid on the table. He also entered
a motion to reconsider the vote on yesterday, whereby the House concurred in the report
of the
Mr. OSBORNE, of Elkhart, also entered his motion to reconsider the vote by which the House concurred in the report of the committee on the bill [S. 65].
Mr. VAWTER offered a joint resolution for instruction and request of Indiana senators and representatives in Congress, to use their influence for the passage of a bill for the payment of Morgan raid claims, which was adopted by yeas 71, nays 16.
On the motion of WILLIARD the bill [H. R. 344] regulating fees and salaries, was taken up, read the third time and passed the House by yeas 64, nays 30, as follows:
Those voting in the affirmative were: Messrs. Alden, Arnold, of Blackford, Arnold, of Wabash, Baker, Barker, Bearss, Blockley, Briggs, Brown, of Jasper, Brown, of Steuben, Bryaut, Campbell, Carter, Compton, Confer, Copeland, Daily, Dalton, Davidson, Davis, Drake, Drover, Edwins, English, Faulkner, Flodder, Galbraith, Hart, Hess, Hubbard, Humphreys, Huthsteiner, Johnson. Kelly, Kester, Kirkpatrick, Lindley, March, Mitchell, Nave, Osborn, of Elkhart, Osborn, of Vermillion, Overmeyer, Owen, Reed, Rodman, Saint, Schweitzer, Shanks, Shauck, Stutt, Snoddy, Stevens, Stucker, Taylor, of Daviess, Taylor, of Lagrange, Taylor, of Warrick, Thayer, Tulley, Vanpelt, Van Valzah, Vawter, Willard, Wimmer, Speaker Cauthorn, H. S.--64.
Those voting in the negative were: Messrs. Allen, Caldwell, Cary, Connaway, Conner, Cunningham, Donnell, Fleming, Garoutte, Ginz, Handy, Harland, Herod, Hopkins, Hosmer, Lehman, Messick, Miers, Perry, Reicheldefer, Robinson, Rooker, Scholl, Shields, Skinner, Sleeth, Thompson, Thornburg, Watson, Works--80.
Pending the roll call--
Mr. ALLEN, when his name was called, in explanation of his vote, said he voted against the bill because of its inequality, and because of its unjust provisions. The bill would impose upon the citizens of his township an unjust burden, and if for no other reason, he would vote against the bill. He voted "no."
Mr. CALDWELL, explaining, said he was willing to go as far as anyone on the floor to procure a fair and honest reduction of fees and salaries. He had hoped that a fee and salary bill would have been reported to this House, distant day the Legislature would have the power to pass a salary law, grading the salary to each officer according to the population in each county, thereby defining what amount of pay such officer shall receive, and believing farther that if this bill becomes a law it will greatly cripple the administration of justice in this State, and deprive the people of that capacity in official position which the public service demands, he should vote "no."
Mr. CONNER, in explanation, said he could not vote for this bill because of its unjust inequalities. The House rescinded its own action on the salary of the Auditor of State, and the bill now allows salary and fees amounting to over $10,000 more than the Governor's salary. That of Superintendent of Public Instruction--the most important office in the State, except that of Governor--is cut down to only $2,000. The bill leaves less than $600 for the pay of the services of many of the clerks of the small counties, and he was anxious to vote for a just reduction of salaries, but as this bill is not such a measure he voted "no."
Mr. REED, in explanation of his vote, said the bill in its present form ought not to become a law, because of the inequality between the salaries of county officers. It discriminates unjustly against county clerks. Believing, however, that the Senate would amend It he voted "aye" simply to give that opportunity.
Mr. TAYLOR, of Daviess, in explanation of his vote, said: This bill did not suit him. Many of its provisions are objectionable, but believing the people demand some action upon the subject he would vote "aye" for the reason that no hope can be entertained of a better bill being presented at this late date of the session.
Mr. THAYER, when his name was called, in explanation said: He did not endorse the bill, but he believed it would be amended in the Senate, he therefore voted "aye."
Mr. THOMPSON, in explanation of his vote, said: He would rather be right than to be a representative or a Democrat, and believing this bill was wrong, he voted "no."
Mr. THORNBURG explaining said: He did not feel as though he could endorse this bill and asked to be excused from voting. Objection being made he voted "no."
Mr. Tulley, in explanation, said: Believing
Mr. VANPELT, when his name was called, said he thought this bill cuts the county clerk and treasurer too low, but hoping it may be amended in the Senate, he voted "aye."
Mr. WATSON, when his name was called, in explaining, said: There was too much inequality in this bill, in proportion to the work done; he, therefore, voted "no."
Mr. WILLARD, in explanation of his vote, said: He voted for this bill because it was the best thing that could be had now, and because he thought it the duty of this (General Assembly to pass a bill for a reduction in fees and salaries. He voted "aye."
Mr. Works when his name was called, in explanation of his vote, said he had no right to transfer the responsibility that rests upon him to the Senate, by saying that he would vote for this bill with the hope that the Senate would amend it, and make it right. He knew the bill was wrong, therefore he voted "no."
The vote was then announced as above recorded.
On motion by Mr. OVERMEYER--yeas 65, nays 23--the bill [S. 399] providing for the submitting of the constitutional amendments to the people, was read the first time and passed to the second reading.
The House proceeded with the roll call, each member, under the rule, having the privilege to call up one bill for final action.
Mr. ALDEN called up the bill [H. R. 401] legalizing acts of the city council of New Albany, which was read the third time and passed the House by yeas 75, nays 2.
Mr. ALLEN called up the bill [H. R. 126] touching foreign corporations, which was read the third time, and passed the House by--yeas 81, nays 0.
The House then took a recess.
Mr. CONNER called up the report of the committee on his bill [H. R. 468] to cheapen the cost, of school books, with amendments agreed upon in committee.
Mr. HUMPHREYS moved an amendment, was adopted, that the existing adoption of school books by the several school boards of the State shall not be interfered with by the provisions of this act, and no change shall be made until after the time for which such school books may have been adopted.
The House then reconsidered its action in taking up this bill, and the Speaker returned the amendments to the members who offered the same.
Mr. ARNOLD, of Blackford, called up his bill [H. R. 206) authorizing county commissioners to pay constables and marshals in certain cases, which was read the third time and finally passed the House, by--yeas 75, nays 3.
Mr. ARNOLD, of Wabash, called up his bill [H. R. 310] to allow sheriffs and. other peace officers to make arrests oat of their county, which was read the third time and passed the House by--yeas 73, nays 0.
Mr. BRIGGS called up his bill [H. R. 549] to amend section 5 of the act to provide for the more speedy trial of causes, and for adjourned terms of courts and judges, in certain cases, which was read the third time and passed the House by--yeas 74, nays 0.
Mr. BROWN, of Jasper, called up Mr. Perry's bill [H. R. 263] in relation to fish, which was read the third time and passed the House by--yeas 59, nays 12.
Mr. BROWN, of Steuben, called up his bill [H. R. 585] to vacate and sell a portion of the public square in the town of Fremont, Steuben county, which was read the third time and passed the house by--yeas 72, nays 0.
Mr. BRYANT called up Mr. Willard's bill [H. R. 487] for the vacation of public squares in certain cases, and providing for the sale of the sale, which was read the third time and passed the House by--yeas 73, nays 8.
Mr. CALDWELL called up the bill [H. R. 625] to amend the first and second sections of an act giving a lien to laborers on work, which was read the third time and passed the House by--yeas 64. nays 3.
The Senate concurrent resolution for the appointment of a joint committee to receive members of the Ohio Legislature, was read and adopted. The speaker made the committee on the part of the House to consist of Messrs. Miers, Brigss and Herod.
Mr. CAMPBELL called up the bill [S. 379] to legalize the annexation of platted territory to the city of Logansport by resolution of the Common Council of May 5,1870, and the annexation to said city of contiguous territory, which was read the third time and passed the House by yeas 64, nays 8.
Mr. CARTER called up the bill [S. 209] to authorize appeals to the circuit court from county commissihners in cases of relocation of county seats, which was read the third time and passed the House by yeas 71, nays 1.
A resolution was adopted that when the House adjourn it adjourn to meet at 8 o'clock this evening [it being understood that there shall be no roll-call at the night sessions].
Mr. CONFER called up the bill [H. R. 412] to amend section 397 of the general practice act in actions for demands for money in the circuit or superior court--if the plaintiff recover less than $50 exclusive of costs he shall pay costs, unless the judgement has been reduced below $50 by set off, in which case the party recovering judgment shal pay costs, which was read the third time, and passed the House by--yeas 64 nays 4.
Mr. CONNER called up his bill [H. R. 20] to establish a bureau of statistics, and abolish the office of State geologist, which was read the third time, and failed to pass the House for want of a constitutional majority, by--yeas 50. nays 23.
The concurrent resolution of the Senate, for the employment of a short-hand reporter for the joint committee to investigate the charges against certain officers of the Benevolent Institution, was adopted.
Mr. COPELAND called up his bill [H. R. 288] regulating the charges of freight on railroads on wheat, corn and flour--which was read the third time, and passed the House by--yeas 51, nays 11.
Then came the recess till 8 o'clock p. m.
Mr. HUMPHRIES, from the
The bill [S. 194] defining who shall be competent witnesses in any court. Also the
bill [S. 270] to repeal the act, establishing the superior courts in Marion county;
[S. 325] granting the citizens of Evansville
a city charter; [S. 381] to provide for legal
printing in newspapers; [S. 303] for a uniform
assessment of property; [S. 196] regulating toll on gravel and other roads; [S. 39] authorizing railroads to extend their
lines; [S. 198] prescribing certain duties of
railroad companies; [S. 17] to drain
The following described bills were introduced, read the first time and passed to the second reading:
By Mr. MARCH, [H. R. 642] supplemental to an act concerning witnesses.
By Mr. CAMPBELL [H. R. 643] to legalize the corporation of the town of Walton, Cass county.
By Mr. WILLARD [H. R. 644] to amend an act to repeal all laws now in force for the assessment of city taxes.
By Mr. CUNNINGHAM [H. R. 645] to amend section 21 of an act providing for the election and appointment of supervisors.
Bills were read the second time and referred to appropriate committees as follows:
The bill [H. R. 635] to amend the act providing for the running at large of domestic animals; [H. R. 636] to amend section 15 of the act regulating elections; [H. R. 634] to amend the act for the uniform assessment of taxes; [H. R. 639] to exempt disabled soldiers from paying poll tax.
The House then adjourned.
The reading of the secretary's minutes of Saturday's proceedings was dispensed with after a correction (on motion by Mr. HARRIS) inserting the motion made [by Mr. Benz] Saturday morning that all senators have leave of absence till Monday week at 2 o'clock p. m.
Mr. REEVE offered a resolution which was adopted, declaring the action of the Senate in granting leave of absence to the whole Senate to be unconstitutional, and ordering the same to be expunged from the journal.
Mr. LEEPER offered a joint resolution authorizing a recovery of the lands reclaimed by the drainage of Beaver and English Lakes and the Kankakee and Calumet rivers. He said: It is supposed that there are many thousand acres of State lands lying in the region of Beaver and English lakes and the Kankakee and Calumet rivers, which have been reclaimed by drainage and of which the State has no record. The purpose of the joint resolution is to provide for the survey of these lands in order that they may be placed in the market.
The joint resolution was adopted by--yeas 37, nays 0.
Mr. BURRELL offered a concurrent resolution, which was adopted, authorizing the governor to surrender to the owner any claim and evidence thereof, on file in his office, in relation to the Mbrgan raid.
On motion by Mr. FOWLER, the fee and salary bill [H. R. 344] was read the first time, and referred to the committee on fees and salaries, with instructions to report to-morrow at 10 o'clock, and, on his further motion, 100 copies were ordered printed.
On motion by Mr. REEVE, the special committee thereon reported back the bill [S. 278] to regulate the practice of medicine and surgery, and the business of apothecary, with a favorable report, which was concurred in.
Mr. HEFRON moved to strike from the first section all after the enacting clause. He objected to attempting to regulate the whole subject of pharmacy and the practice of medicine at once, much preferring to try only to regulate the practice of medicine.
Mr. REEVE asserted that this bill has caused as much criticism as any bill before either House this session, and has been pretty generally agreed upon by all concerned. Why there is objection to restraining the dealing out of the deadliest material known to be in existence is something he could not understand. The bill is liberal enough, and this section particularly should not be stricken out. Of the two, it is best to require knowledge of the one who dispenses, rather than the one who prescribes.
Mr. BURRELL regarded the amendment as intended to kill the bill. He thought there should be some kind of legislation on this subject, but was uncertain as to whether or not this bill was acceptable to the medical profession and the people generally.
Mr. WOOLLEN thought the connecting of druggists and pharmacists with this bill would kill it, though he admitted such legislation la necessary. It were better, he thought, to have separate bills for each subject. This provision is too stringent for the country trade, and for that reason only would prefer to see the amendment adopted.
Mr. SHAFFER would prefer this subject be legislated on rather than the one referring to the practice of medicine, for it is far more important to the people. But it can do no harm to legislate on the two subjects proposed in this bill, because the druggist and the physician are in innately connected. He hoped the amendment would not be concurred. There is no other way so easy to get rid of the harm produced by the thousands of vicious nostrums now vended by druggists. This bill will meet the wants of the profession and the wishes of the people.
Mr. URMSTON would rather see all relating to physicians stricken from this bill than that the amendment should pass. The result of this amendment would be to multiply the already too numerous drug stores, because the physician incompetent to obtain a license to practice would go to selling drugs most naturally.
Mr. REEVE directed attention to the careful wording of the section. Where so simple and
so liberal a provision will make human life
Mr. COFFEY felt sure that for want of time this bill could not be properly matured, and he therefore made an ineffectual motion--yeas 11, nays 30--that the bill be indefinitely postponed.
Mr. STREIGHT moved to substitute for this one his bill, S.149 on the same subject.
The amendment was rejected.
The Senate took a recess till 2 o'clook.
On motion by Mr. WOOLLEN, section 2 was amended providing that any one may carry on such business it he keeps a licensed employe to compound and deal out drugs and medicines for sale.
Mr. MENZIES regarded the meat in this bill to be in section 5, which proposes to get up a medical oligarchy in Indianapolis--a sort of medical ring which would govern the whole State.
Mr. REEVE individually desired that every section in this bill should be fairly considered. He proposed it upon consultation with no one--no medical man had any dictation in it. In connection, with the rest of the bill, it can be shown that there is no ring in it; there can be no ring, and there can be nothing unfair about it; no conflict, and no rivalries between the different schools can exist under it.
Mr. WOOLLEN desired to see the word "allopathic" eliminated from the section. His school was called "regular," and he desired that word substituted for "allopathic." We have the privilege of treating cases as we may desire; we are simply physicians; others may be what they please.
Mr. WINTERB0THAM favored some such measure, believing tho people suffered more from quackery than anything else, but he desired to see the proviso allowing traveling expenses,stricken out, because that clause was so often made to cover a multitude of extras,
Mr. MENZIES moved an amendment by way of a substitute for section five, authorizing the circuit, judge of the largest county in the congressional district, to appoint the five members of the examining board, to be selected from the various schools He said it was wrong to require all the applicants for examination to come up to Indianapolis, as the bill under consideration would.
Mr. KRAMER favored a county board.
Mr. STREIGHT hoped the substitute would be adopted, because there were good reasons why applicants for examination should not be compelled to come up to Indianapolis. He thought it unfair to build up a medical aristocracy in Indianapolis, and he believed in distributing these offices
Mr. REEVE referred to a great complaint that the medical colleges sell their diplomas. Under this bill no one is compelled to come to Indianapolis except new students, and the expense need not be a quarter of what it would be otherwise. If 25 come here a year it will be a larger number than he expects.
Mr. SHAFFER had no serious objection to the section. The expense of a State board would be but a trifle more than the expense of a Congressional board; but the beauty of a State board would consist in the uniformity of standard, of qualification which would be required.
The substitute was adopted by--yeas 32, nays 12.
Mr. STREIGHT reported the provisions of the seventh section as too severe, and he moved to strike it out.
Mr. WOOLLEN moved a substitute for section 7, making the penalty a "misdemeanor" instead of a "felony," which was adopted by--yeas 29, nays 10.
On motion by Mr. STREIGHT, the word "intentional" was stricken out of section 13.
On motion by Mr. GARRIGUS, section 16 was amended by adding thereto these words; "Physicians of all schools of medicine shall have equal rights and privileges under this act, in all respects."
Mr. SARNIGHAUSEN moved to strike out the clause requiring a minute description of the licensed physician.
Mr. REEVE saw no good reason why a physician should not have a good personal description preserved on the records of the board of examiners, in case it should become necessary to use it.
The amendment was agreed to.
Mr. DONHAM moved to amend by providing that each physician shall write his prescriptions in English as far as possible.
The amendment was agreed to.
Mr. WOOD regarded this as perhaps the very worst piece of legislation ever brought into this hall. It is in conflict with the constitution. The only argument he had heard in its favor is that good doctors must be protected from quacks? Why not legislate in favor of good blacksmiths, or good farmers or good grocerymen as against quacks. All the laws that can be piled on the statute books cam not protect the people against quacks. Sound medical men, well educated medical men, in any large numbers, are not asking this kind of legislation. It is the quack who is asking for this bill, which proposes the worst kind of class legislation.
Mr. WOOLEN assured senators that this is not a selfish matter on the part of physicians. Quacks do not affect regular physicians. This bill is for the protection of the people, and he thought that well understood.
Under the operation of the previous question demanded by Mr. WOOLEN the bill was passed the second reading as amended, and ordered to be engrossed.
A message from the governor announced his acceptance of the resignation of Hon. Wm. HEILMAN, late senator from the county of Vanderburg.
On motion by Mr. BURRELL the bill [H. R. 340] to fix the number of senators and representatives in the General Assembly of Indiana and to apportion the same among the several counties of the State, was taken up, under the operation of the previous question demanded by Mr. Burrell, and read the second time.
Mr. STREIGHT made an ineffectual motion--yeas 17, nays 30--to adjourn.
Mr. DAVIS moved to amend the bill by way of substitute--striking out from the first section, and inserting new matter.
Mr. MENZIES moved the adoption of the substitute, and demanded the previous question, on the seconding of which, the yeas and nays were demanded by Messrs. Harris and Kahlo, and, being taken, resulted--yeas 26, nays 21.
Pending the roll call--
Mr. VIEHE, in explanation, when his name was called, stated that he agreed with the senator from Vanderburg [Mr. Heilman], who said he would not go home till 11 to-night, to pair with him; not if he filed his resignation to-day, Mr. V. agreed not to vote on any political measure.
Mr. MOORE, when his named was called, announced his pair with the senator from Blackford [Mr. Briscoe] for to-day.
So the Senate seconded the demand, for the
Those who voted in the affirmative were Messrs. Benz, Burrell, Coffey, Davis, Donham, Foster, Fowler, Hart, Hefron, Kent, Kramer, Leeper, Major, Menzies, Peterson, Reeve, Reiley, Sarnighausen, Tarlton, Traylor,Urmston, Wood, Woollen and Winterbotham--24.
Those who voted in the negative were Messrs, Cadwallader, Comstock, Davenport, Dice, Garrigus, Grubbs, Harris, Kahlo, Langdon, Mercer, Olds, Poindexter, Ragan, Shaffer, Shirk, Streight, Taylor, Treat, Trusler, Weir and Wilson--21.
Mr. MENZIES moved to reconsider the vote last taken and to lay that motion on the table.
The latter motion was agreed to by yeas 24, nays 21.
The Senate amendments to the bill [H. R. 340] were ordered engrossed.
On motion by Mr. COFFEY, a vote of Saturday by which the bill [H. R. 9] to regulate the setting of corner stones in public highways were reconsidered.
And then the Senate adjourned.
The reading of the journal was dispensed with.
The following described bills were read the second time by title only, and referred to appropriate committees:
The specific appropriation [H. R. 640];Mr. Moore's bill [H. R. 641] supplemental to an act in relation to competent witnesses; Mr. Campbell's bill [H. R 642] to legalize the incorporation of the town of Walton, in Cass county; Mr. Willard's bill [H. R. 643 ]to amend section 48 of an act to repeal all general laws now in force for the incorporation of cities, and to regulate other matters property connected therewith, approved March 14, 1867, [which was subsequently returned with a favorable report, and ordered engrossed]; Mr. Cunningham's bill [H. R. 644] to amend section 21 of an act providing for the election of supervisors. The following described Senate bills were read the second time, by title only, and referred to appropriate committees:
The bill [S. 122] for repairs of free turnpikes; [S. 69] for an asylum for feeble minded children ; [S. 103] to authorize cities to construct water works; [S. 17] to enable owners of wet lands to reclaim the same; [S. 399] for the submission of the proposed constitutional amendments ; [S. 325] to amend the Evansville charter; [S. 207] for determining and allowing claims against the State; [S. 308] to amend the uniform assessment of taxes, act of Dec. 21, 1872; [S. 198] prescribing certain duties of railroad companies; [S. 196] regulating the toll charged on plunk and other roads; [S. 57] for the establishment of workhouses; [S. 175] providing for the appointment of county superintendents ; [S. 258] to legalize the acts of the Council of Fort Wayne: [S. 61] to provide for the election of sheriffs; [S. 381] to provide for the publication of legal matter; [S. 270] to repeal an act for the establishment of superior courts; [S. 194] defining who shall be competent witnesses; [S. 267] to amend sections 550 and 555 of the general practice act; [S. 56] to amend sections 175 and 176 of the general practice act; [S. 39] in relation to changing proposed line of railroads; [S. 347] to change the name of Evansville; [S. 176] to legalize the official act of the town of Jasper; [S. 169] to prevent persons from running of property; [S. 197] to protect the ballot box; [S. 271] enlarging the jurisdiction of mayors.
The bill [H. R. 620] to provide for a general system of common schools was read the second time by title only, and passed to the third reading.
The bill [S. 442] defining the time for holding general elections was read the first time, and passed to the second reading.
Mr. ENGLISH, by request, introduced a bill [H. R. 645] extending the facilities for literary, scientific and social culture; also a resolution, which was adopted, authorizing the insurance against fire of the State libraries and buildings.
Mr. HEROD offered a resolution for the surrender of the charter of the Woodburn Sarven Wheel company, which was adopted
The bill [H. R. 612] supplemental to the act concerning the partition of land, for action thereon; also, [H. R. 631] legalizing sheriff's sales; also, the bill [H. R. 408] to provide for the election of county superintendent; also, the bill [H. R. 467] regulating descents; also, the bill [H. R. 477] to punish burglary; also, the bill [H. R. 586] concerning interest on judgments; also, [H. R. 110] prohibiting court officers from practicing law; were severally ordered, engrossed.
Also, the bill [H. R. 116] prohibiting sale of property on execution for less than two-thirds of appraisement, recommending indefinite postponement.
Mr. MAJOR was opposed to the selling of property for less than the appraised value.
Mr. WORKS said that the bill failed to reach the point the author intended, and therefore the committee reported that the bill be indefinitely postponed.
Mr. OSBORNE, of Elkhart, said the House could not afford to put out a law upon the statute book, as it would be nugatory.
The report was concurred in.
Also the bill [H. R. 353] defining what is a legal newspaper was an unfavorable report.
Mr. KELLEY said he wanted the law to show distinctly what a newspaper was, and he asked the House to reverse the decision of the committee, and pass the bill.
The SPEAKER said this bill proposes to legalize the newspapers that have one-half of their matter printed in other States.
Mr. OSBORNE, of Elkhart, said the committee could not recommend the passage of the bill because they thought there was no legal question involved. The report was rejected and the bill was ordered engrossed.
Mr. GORDON introduced a bill [H. R. 646]changing the name of the Marion criminal circuit court to the Marion criminal court, which was read the first time and passed to the second reading.
Mr. SAINT moved for a reconsideration of the vote whereby the House concurred in the report to indefinitely postpone the bill [H. R. 520]--nine jurors may render a verdict--which was agreed to,
Mr. WATSON hoped the report would not be concurred in.
Mr. SAINT would like to see this law applied to civil cases, and he was willing to allow three-fourths of a jury to bring in a verdict.
Mr. TAYLOR of Daviess was opposed to the bill and in favor of the report. He had heard no good reason why the jury system should be changed.
Mr. DRAKE thought perhaps it was time to make a change in these old laws.
The report of the committee was then rejected.
On the motion of Mr. WATSON, the bill was recommitted, and the committee instructed to report to-morrow.
Mr. CUNNINGHAM called up Mr. Williard's bill [H. R. 488] to amend section 569 of the general practice act. If the court affirm the judgment in any case, when the question involved is one of damages to personal property, it shall upon affirming said judgment assess punitive damages not less than 50 per cent. in favor of the person whose property has been injured; and it was passed the House by--yeas 67, nays 7.
Mr. DAILEY called up his bill [H. R. 47] to enable owners of wet lands to drain and reclaim the same, when it can not be done without affecting the lands of others; was read the third time, Mr. Dailey explaining its provisions.
Mr. BAKER objected to the bill, because there was too much machinery, and it would cost too much.
Mr. SHANKS was in favor of the bill, because it explained what it wanted, and he hoped the bill would pass.
Mr. MARCH believed this was a good bill, and hoped it would pass
Mr. SAINT said he thought this bill would save a good deal of litigation, and did not see too much machinery about it. He hoped it would pass.
The bill finally passed the House by--yeas 70, nays 7.
Mr. KIRKPATRICK, explaining his affirmative vote, said this was a better law than the old law, but he believed the Senate bill was still better.
Mr. DALTON called up the bill [H. R. 608] for the relief of sureties of Jefferson Ollitant, defaulting trustee of Center township, Green county, which was read the third time and passed by--yeas 70, nays 1.
Mr. DONNELL called up his bill [H. R. 367] regulating the jurisdiction of justices of the peace. The number of justices of the peace shall be regulated by county commissioners, not to exceed one in each township and one for each incorporated town and two in addition for cities; shall have jurisdiction founded on contract or tort when it does not exceed $100, and concurrent jurisdiction to the amount of $300, but defendent may confess judgement not exceeding $500. No justice shall have jurisdiction in slander or breech of marriage contract, nor any action wherein the title to bonds shall come in question, or the justice be related to either party by marriage or otherwise, was read the third time and passed the House by yeas 64, nays 10.
Mr. DRAKE called up the bill [S. 60] to make a change of judicial circuits as between the counties of Switzerland and Scott, was read the third time and passed the House by yeas 52, nays 20.
Then came the recess till 2 o'clock.
Mr. SCHWEITZER offered a resolution that a committee of seven be appointed to investigate the auditor's office, for the four years preceding the term of Mr. Eb. Henderson.
Mr. GORDON moved to amend so that the same committee heretofore appointed to investigate said office, shall make that investigation. The amendment was agreed to, and the resolution, as amended, adopted.
Mr. ENGLISH, from the committee thereon, returned the bill [H. R. 270] for the protection of the ballot-box, recommending passage. It was ordered engrossed.
Mr. THOMPSON, from the committee on benevolent institutions, returned the bill, S. 69, for the organization and support of an asylum for feeble-minded children, with a recommendation for passage. It was ordered engrossed.
Mr. EDWINS called up his bill [H. R. 560] for the relief of John J. Justin, trustee; it was read the third time, and passed the House by--yeas 70, nays 3.
Mr. ENGLISH called up his bill [H. R. 3] for the assessment of real estate in the year 1879, and every five years thereafter.
Mr. HUBBARD said there was one serious objection to the bill, that of the assessment of real estate in 1879. We were apt to go too far the other way, and, in the present financial depression, it would likely work a wrong.
Mr. GORDON favored a reassessment. The county needs to come back to a specie payment basis on our real estate as well as in other things.
Mr. HUMPHREYS thought it might be hardship as tar as Indianapolis was concerned, but he aid not think it was so in other parts of the State. Seventeen dollars and fifty cents was the average value of land and improvements, and he did not think that was high. He thought there was no excuse for appraising lands now. They would be appraised in 1880, and if you reappraise now yon make a deficiency in the revenue for 1880.
Mr. BARKER did not see why land should not be reappraised. There was a general demand for it, and he believed it was right.
Mr. WILLARD said, in a question like this the House ought to have some confidence in the judgment of members of the committee on ways and means. If you decrease the levy we have made, you drive the State in debt, or you close up your benevolent institutions. The decision of that committee ought to have some weight. He hoped the bill would not pass.
Mr. SLEETH said let the assessment come one year sooner; it will cost no more. It necessarily follows that if you reduce valuation, the revenue goes down; but as the valuation goes down your levy must go up. In his county there were no cities, but the farm land was appraised at $39 per acre, which is more than they could possibly sell it for. The man who has his means invested in real estate pays the most tax, and he was in favor of an equalization of this matter.
Mr. HART said he was a farmer, and he did not think that the farmers in bis county wanted a reappraisement now. He thought the land was valued lower in proportion to other species of property, and there was no reason for a reappraisement of property in 1879.
Mr. VANPELT said men should pay according to what they were worth. The farmers in his county demand a reappraisement.
Mr. BROWN, of Stenben, hoped the bill would pass.
Mr. BLACKLEY thought the appraisement in the country was right, and he saw no reason for a reappraisement in 1879.
Mr. TULLEY hoped the bill would not pass.
Mr. STEVENS considered the present appraisement unequal and wrong, and he thought the people should be relieved under this bill as soon as possible.
Mr. ENGLISH--The object of this bill was to bring the real and personal property upon an equality.
The bill then failed to pass by yeas 41, nays 45.
Mr. FANCHER called up his bill [H. R. 290] to prevent the running at large of animals, which was read the third time, and passed the House by yeas 76, nays 5.
Mr. FAULKNER called up his bill [H. R. 526] fixing the time of holding court in the Seventh circuit, which was read the third time, and failed to pass, for want of a constitutional majority, by yeas 46, nays 36.
Mr. FLEMING called up the bill [S. 184] to
prevent the practice of resorting to distant
Mr. CAREY called up his bill [H. R. 466] County Commissioners may appropriate money for the relief of citizens in certain oases, which was read the third time and passed the House by--yeas 77, nays 5.
Mr. FLODDER called up Mr. Perry's bill [H. R. 529] for the reappraisement of land forfeited to the school fund, which was read the third time and passed the House by--yeas 82, nays 2.
Mr. BLACKLEY called up his bill [H. R. 257] to facilitate work on highways and to abolish the office of supervisor, which was read the third time and failed to pass the House by yeas--24, nays 62.
Mr. GALBRAITH called up Mr. Edwins' bill [H. R. 377] for regulating the practice of medicine, which was read the third time.
Mr. DRAKE considered this a bill to license quackery. It requires only 16 weeks before a man can practice medicine. He should vote against it.
Mr. SCHOLL said a diploma was a prima facie evidence that the holder had prepared himself for the practice of medicine. That diploma has to be issued by a regularly chartered medical college. This was a plain, practical bill, and he would vote for it.
Mr. THAYER came here instructed to use his influence for the passage of any bill that will relieve the people from that class of men called, quack doctors. This was a step in the right direction, and he hoped this bill would be passed.
Mr. BRYANT felt the necessity of passing some such a bill, but it should be most carefully considered. If we make a start, we should start in the right direction. This bill does injustice to a large class, for the student of 20 months can get license to practice, while the man who has practiced medicine for four years and 11 months will, under this bill, have to set aside. He hoped this bill may not pass.
Mr. CONFER said there was some difficulty in getting at this in the proper respect. This bill does not meet the requirement of the people. He could not support the bill.
Mr. HUBBARD would rather employ a man who had a large experience, than a man with no experience, and with one or more diplomas. He thought a little catnip and dough pills would do more good than strong medicine. He was opposed to the bill.
Mr. GORDON was sure that as science advances, human life would be longer preserved. He was willing that this bill should pass, because it was probably the best one we could get, and he should vote for its passage.
Mr. EDWINS was here to elevate the practice of medicines, and he had introduced this bill with that purpose, and had submitted it to an association of physicians from all parts of the State who had assembled in this city and considered this bill section by section and endorsed it almost unanimously. It was a step in the right direction, and in two years more it could be added to or amended if it was found necessary.
The bill then failed in the House for want of a constitutional majority by yeas 48, nays 30.
The House then adjourned.
The minutes were not read.
Mr. BURRELL moved to take up the bill [H. R. 340] to apportion the State for senatorial and representative purposes, and read it the third time now, and, on that motion, demanded the previous question, which was seconded by--yeas 27, nays 20. The main question being ordered, without a division, the motion to take up the bill was agreed to by--yeas 26, nays 21. The bill [H. R. 340] being read the third time--
Mr. BURRELL moved the bill be put on its passage now, and, on that motion, demanded the previous question, which was seconded by--yeas 26, nays 21--the main question ordered, and the bill passed the Senate by--yeas 26, nays 21--as follows:
Those voting in the affirmative were Messrs. Benz, Briscoe, Burrell, Coffey, Davis, Donham, Foster, Fowler, Hart, Hefron, Kent, Kramer, Leeper, Major, Menzies, Peterson, Reeves, Reiley, Sarnighausen, Tarlton, Traylor, Urmston, Viehe, Wood, Woollen and Winterbotham--26.
Those voting in the negative were Messrs, Cadwallader, Comstock, Davenport, Dice, Garrigus, Grubbs, Harris, Kahlo, Langdon, Mercer, Moore, Olds, Poindexter, Ragan, Shaffer, Smith, Taylor, Treat, Trusler, Weir and Wilson--21.
Pending the roll call--
Mr. HARRIS, in explanation of his vote, said: He found in the National platform a declaration that the National party are in favor of a fair and equitable apportionment which shall secure a fair and un trammeled expression of the political sentiment of the people. On an examination of the election returns of 1876 and 1878 he finds that at neither election has the Democratic party cast 50 per cent. of the votes. He finds, also, on examining the senatorial apportionment as made in the substitute adopted for this bill that 60 per cent. is given to the Democracy, leaving 40 per cent. to be divided between the National and Republican party, and the apportionment for members of the House of Representatives is very nearly the same as the estimate for senators. He thought it an unfair bill, and therefore voted "no,"
Mr. REEVE, when his name was called, said he had noticed that if a grind-stone has too much grit on one side it wears unevenly and becomes "one-sided." So with political parties. When one has been in power a long time, it becomes "one-sided" and any change is beneficial. The Republicans have had control a long time and has too much grit on one side and is worn "out of round." The Democrats have a very narrow margin--too narrow to walk on firmly in effecting a change, and are dependent on help. This bill does not suit him, but it is the best we can get with the help we have. He wished to take advantage of the help while it is willing, and he voted for the bill because he wanted a change, and this is the best we can get now.
Mr. SHAFFER, when his name was called in explanation of his vote said, he did not consider the bill fair, for several reasons; the principal one being that it placed him in a Democratic district [laughter] and he had no doubt there are other members in the same position. Upon these grounds, and others, he voted "no."
The vote was then announced as above recorded; and so the bill passed the Senate.
Mr. MENZIES moved to dispense with the regular order of business, and take up the bill [H. R. 112] for the appointment of the Trustees of the Benevolent Institutions of the State; that it be put on its passage now and on these motions he demanded the previous question. which was seconded by yeas 25, nays 22, and under its operations the motion to take the bill was agreed to, by yeas 26, nays 23, and the bill was read the third time.
On the further motion of Mr. MENZIES, under another demand for the previous question, the bill was passed the Senate by--yeas 26, nays 23, a similar vote to the one on the passage of the apportionment bill, addling Messrs. Shirk and Streight to the nays.
On motion by Mr. TRAYLOR, his bill [S. 313] concerning the publication of legal
advertisements in newspapers was read the second time, and under a dispensation of the
consti-[tutional].
On motion by Mr. DICE, his bill [S. 392] to legalize certain acts of the circuit court in his district, was read the second time with a report thereon recommending indefinite postponement. He resisted concurrence in the report.
Mr. KENT also favored the bill.
Mr. BURRELL opposed its passage.
On motion by Mr. DICE the report was concurred in, the constitutional restriction was dispensed with, and the bill pressed to its final reading and passage by--yeas 38, nays 0.
Mr HARRIS was not willing the companies should select their own papers, because they might select papers with obscure circulation. These insurance companies ought to be made to publish their condition. The object is to inform the agent of every company the condition of every other company in the State. The law ought to be amended. The principle in the bill is right.
Mr. MENZIES was not bound down to either amending or abolishing the present law. It is against just principles to tax one branch of business for another branch. Foreign insurance companies, by the present law, have an annual tax levied on them for the support of two papers in Indianapolis, Why select two papers here? In the northern part of the State the Chicago papers circulate, and in the southern part Cincinnati and Louisville papers circulate, more generally than the Indianapolis papers. In his county, not 10 copies of the Sentinel are taken, and but three copies of the Journal. This odious tax rests upon the policy holder in this State, and it is wrong in principle.
Mr. REEVE: This insurance steal has occupied the public attention until it hay become known under the title or name of "insurance steal." It puts into the treasury of two newspapers $10,000 apiece, for which an amount of printing is done entirely uncalled for. Bat the Insurance companies are taxed $56,000 which has to be paid by the policy holders resident here. This bill ought to be disposed of suddenly.
Mr. WINTERBOTHAM was a member of the Senate when the present law passed, and this matter of advertising was so covered up he did not know of it, nor did many other members. This is an unnecessary and uncalled for expense, and the law ought never to have been on the statute books. It is nothing but a sudsidy for two newspapers in Indianapolis.
Mr. STREIGHT also voted for this bill two years ago, but was convinced great abuse had grown up under it. He now favored overhauling this matter, which has grown to be a scandal and a disgrace.
Mr. BRISCOE wanted to know who are to be benefited by this measure. He would like to see this bill thoroughly ventilated.
Mr. FOWLER voted for this bill two years ago, taking the word of others that it was all right. No vote given in the last assembly did he regret so much as giving aid to this fraud, gotten up for the benefit of two Indianapolis papers. It is of no benefit to any policy holder. It should be repealed.
The motion was agreed to, and the bill 423 was read the first time, having been
referred to the
On the further motion of Mr. MENZIES, the constitutional rule was dispensed with, and the bill read by title only for the second reading.
Mr. COMSTOCK moved to amend, by providing for the printing of semi-annual insurance statements in one weekly paper in this State.
Mr. HARRIS offered a substitute, requiring the State auditor to make the publications in two newspapers in the State--one of which shall be in Indianapolis--the insurance companies to select the medium for advertising.
Mr. HEFRON was astonished at the outburst of indignation against this law. The principle of the law is right, and ought to be maintained. There may be errors in it, but they should be corrected. The law permits the printer to make no greater charge against these wealthy corporations than as against the heirs of the estate of a deceased citizen, be he ever so poor.
Mr. REEVE desired to see an amendment to the bill requiring a copy of these statements to be filed in the recorder's office of each county. It is an unwarrantable steal to require agents to procure license oftener than once a year; it is a fraud on every insurance company outside of the State, and is only desired by its beneficiaries and the local insurance companies.
Then came the recess till 2 o'clock.
Mr. COMSTOOK explained this bill only changes the present law by leaving out the clause requiring the state auditor to have semi-annual statements of foreign insurance companies published in the two daily newspapers of the State. It simply proposes to put foreign insurance companies on the same footing with other insurance companies. It is a bill in the interest of the people, because every tax levied on insurance companies must eventually come off the people. He regarded the publication of these statements as unnecessary and productive of no good.
Mr. BURRELL said the law was intended to protect the public against bogus foreign insurance companies. It may be possible it was a mistake in requiring the publication of statement in certain newspapers. It may be a mistake in making the price therefor $1 per square. The price should probably be cut down one-half, and the law might be amended in other particulars.
Mr. WINTERBOTHAM said this law gives to the Auditor of State an enormous fee, and is used to subsidize two daily newspapers of this city, and a great wrong is being done in having these statements published, while they are required to be kept on file in every clerk's office in the State.
Mr. WOOD: The people are not asking that the Legislature shall not require these publications, but it is the foreign insurance companies who are asking it, because they do not want to show the people what their condition is.
Mr. HEFRON opposed the substitute amendment, regarding no requirement on the subject as preferable, because the company would procure the publication in any backwoods county, in any 6x8 newspaper that will do the work cheapest.
Mr. REEVE called attentien to the question before the Senate, which is, when and where shall these statements be published. The law now makes a monopoly of the publication resting in two papers. No good results to the State by oppressing capital whether it be home or foreign. While not liking the substitute he would favor it, believing it the best thing that could be done, at this late date, under the circumstances.
The substitute was rejected by yeas 13, nays, 30, and the amendment was rejected by yeas 22, nays 23.
Mr. WILSON moved an amendment requiring foreign companies to invest three-fourths of their receipts for premiums in this State in good securities therein.
Mr. MENZIES regarded such an amendment in effect as prohibiting foreign insurance companies from doing business in this State.
On motion by Mr. OLDS it was rejected by yeas 26. nays 20.
Mr. WOOLLEN moved to amend by adding that the semi-annual statements shall be published in two Indianapolis dailies, and one paper in each county where doing business.
Mr. REEVE moved as a substitute that the company shall publish its statement in one weekly newspaper in Indianapolis, and file proof thereof with the auditor of state.
Mr. GARRIGUS thought there was more sympathy expressed for foreign insurance companies here than has been expressed for the people in the last two months. The pending substitute requires the state auditor to work for these companies without pay, and that is not right.
Mr. MENZIES disclaimed that this bill was in the interest of insurance companies, foreign or domestic.
Mr. FOWLER saw no necessity requiring the publication of these statements in news- papers at all, as such statements were kept on file in every clerk's office in every county in the State.
The substitute was ageeed to by--yeas 25, nays 22.
Mr. COFFEY would like to see a changeof the law so as to require 3 per cent. to be paid in the treasury on the gross receipts of the company, and he offered such an amendment.
Mr. HEFRON favored this amendment.
Mr. FOWLER regarded the present law as not only a stupendous fraud, but a stupendouvilliany. Though not a friend to corporations he opposed the amendment as unjust to them.
Mr. WINTERBOTHAM opposed the amendment.
It was rejected by yeas 20, nays 25.
On motion by Mr. BURRELL the request of the House of Representatives for a
The LIEUTENANT GOVERNOR makes such committee on the part of the Senate to consist, of Messrs. Burrell and Davis.
On motion by Mr. REEVE the fee and salary bill was made the special order for to-morrow at 9 o'clock.
And then the Senate adjourned.
The minutes were not read.
Mr. JOHNSON, from the special committee thereon, returned the bill [H. R. 262] requiring county commissioners to let the county printing to the lowest bidder, reporting that they had amended the bill as instructed, and recommending its passage. The report was concurred in and the bill ordered engrossed.
Mr. HEROD, from the
The
Mr. GORDON moved to reconsider the vote by which the House concurred in the
unfavorable report of the
Mr. GAROUTTE called up his bill [H. R. 138] requiring township trustees to appropriate any surplus funds now on hand to the benefit of the road fund, which was read the third time and passed the House by--yeas 61, nays 14.
Mr. GINZ called up his bill [H. R. 264] for an act that, hereafter, when any company, corporation or person engaged in business or construction of any work or building, shall become insolvent or their property seized, or when their business shall be suspended by the action of creditors, in all such cases the debts owing to laborers, which have accrued for labor, shall be considered and treated as preferred claims, and shall be first paid, which was read the first time and passed by--yeas 78, nays 0.
Mr. GOLDEN called up the bill [S. 65] defining libel, and to prevent the publication thereof, which was read as amended by the committee, striking out. all alter the enacting clause, and inserting the substance of Mr. Gordon's bill [H. R. 347]--pending the consideration of which--
On the motion of Mr. LEHMAN, the House took a recess of 10 minutes, out of respect to the visting members of the Ohio Legislature.
The SPEAKER again called the House to order, and the bill[S. 65] was read the third time.
Mr. OVERMEYER thought the Senate bill, which was short, was better than the House bill, and, to relieve the House from embarrassment, he moved to recommit the bill to a select committee, with instruction to report back the Senate bill as it came from the Senate.
Mr. WILLARD thought if the bill was referred to a committee, that would be the end of it. If we are to have a libel law, let us pass this bill. He hoped the motion to recommit would not prevail.
Mr. GORDON said he had adopted in his bill the language used in the New York code, not defining the particular act, but what shall be in a general way a libel.
The motion to recommit was rejected, and the bill as amended was then passed, the House by yeas 91, nays 0.
Mr. EDWINS called up his bill [H. R. 377] to regulate the practice of medicine, which failed to pass the House on yesterday for want of a constitutional majority. It was now passed the House by yeas 57, nays 29.
Mr. ENGLISH moved to temporarily suspend the regular order and take up the message from the Senate just received, announcing the passage of the apportionment bill [H. R. 340], which motion was agreed to by--yeas 49, nays 43--The SPEAKER ruling that under the provisions of rule 54 it did not require two-thirds to suspend the rule to take up messages from the Senate.
Mr. OVERMEYER and Mr. SHANKS appealed from the decision of the chair that it requires a two-thirds vote to suspend the order of business.
Mr. THOMPSON moved ineffectually to lay the appeal on the table--yeas 46, nays 47.
The decision of the chair was sustained by--yeas 50, nays 43.
The bill [H. R. 340] for the apportionment of the State for legislative purposes, with the Senate amendments thereon, were read:
The House refused to concur in the amendments of the Senate by--yeas 13, nays 81.
Mr. ENGLISH moved that a committee of conference on the part of the House be appointed to confer with the Senate.
Mr. 0VERMEYER moved ineffectually to lay the motion on the table--yeas 41, nays 50.
The motion for a conference was then agreed to, and the Speaker subsequently appointed as said committee on the part of the House Messrs. English and Dalton.
Mr. OVERMEYFJR moved that the order of business be temporarily suspended in order that
the
Mr. WILLARD moved to lay the motion on the table, which was agreed to by--yeas 49, nays 44.
Mr. GORDON called up his bill [H. R. 532] providing for the education of colored children upon an equal footing with white children, which was read the third time.
Then came the recess till 2 o'clock.
Mr. GORDON said in 1869 the Legislature levied a tax for the first time to sustain the common schools--the black and white children to be provided for by separate schools. The white children had a day school for nine months in the year, while the colored children had only two weeks of night school. The bill provides that colored schools shall be established only where it is equal. If there are a sufficient number they are to have a separate room, or a separate part of the same room. Justice requires that we should give this race an equal opportunity for education.
The bill passed the House by--yeas 60, nays 30.
Pending the roll call--
Mr. OVERMEYER when his name was called said: He supported the 14th amendment to the constitution of the United States in the first vote he ever cast at the election of 1866. As a member of the House he voted for the ratification of the 15th amendment in 1869. This bill is simply the logical conclusion to which those two great amendments lead. He, therefore, very cheerfully voted "aye."
Mr. SLEETH, when his name was called, in explanation of his vote said: In 1872 as a member of the Senate he took an oath to support the constitution of the State and the saw in sec. one of article eight of the constitution a provision that the common schools should be equally open to all. He knew the poor negro was one of that "all" and he immediately introduced a bill similar to the one now before the House. That bill was then killed by a Democratic House, but he still stood where he stood then. He voted "aye."
Mr. TULLEY, when his name was called, in explanation said: He recognized most fully the logic of events, and he believed that the day is not far distant when there shall he no legal distinction between white and blacks, male or female, when all shall stand on an equal platform. He therefore voted "aye."
The vote was then announced as above.
Mr. HANDY called up his bill [H. R. 456] to require certain gravel, macadamized and plank road companies, to whom was relinquished the right of the State in the so-called National and Cumberland road, to finish, complete and keep the same in repair within a certain time, which was read the third time, and passed the House by--yeas 54, nays 35.
Mr. HARLAN called up the bill [H. R. 392] establishing a militia of the States, which was read the third time.
Mr SHANKS said this was a time for economy. This bill calls for an appropriation of $50,000. If you want a militia he thought this a good bill, and the appropriation was hardly half what our sister State appropriates annually to the support of State militia. The fact that the Southern States had their militia organized cost the sacrifice of a large number of human lives. He hoped that the people in time of peace would prepare for war. Pennsylvania appropriates annually $250,000; New York $250,000; New Jersey $50,000, and States adjoining us as follows: Illinois, $100,000; Michigan, $100,000, and Ohio $250,000. There are now scattered among the counties in the State over $400,000 of arms and equipments, that need caring for the State receives annually in arms $7,500, and that will be needless unless we have a military organization. A well-organized militia in the State will prevent the very troubles in the State that they were organized to subdue.
Mr. JOHNSON--When he was young there were military companies organized, and they drew arms. The arms were now all gone--used up for corn-knives and pruning-hooks. He was in hopes the bill would not pass.
Mr. SLEETH did not know any State or country with the population of Indiana that did not have a military protection in some shape. We can not maintain civil government without the power to maintain the decisions of the courts. It was time our State had taken some steps in this direction. We have to legislate for society as it is, and not as it should be We are tending toward peace--difficulties are being settled by conventions. He would like to see this bill pass.
Mr. WORKS thought it was right and proper that this State should provide for a militia. It seemed to him the amount appropriated was none too large.
Mr. OSBORNE, of Elkhart. did not believe that the people of this State required a militia at this time. If the time should come when militia are demanded to sustain the laws you will see the beginning of the end of this Government. No army power is needed to follow up the constable to protect him in the dis- charge of his duty. It was not fair to fasten. such an organization upon the State, because in a few instances the people become unmanagable. Fifty thousand dollars this year means $100,000 next. It is contrary to the genius of the institutions of our county, and ought to fall dead before the House.
Mr. WILLARD said that the present Governor of the State had seen the need of a military organization to preserve the peace of the State. The Sheriff can not control these outbreaks with undrilled men. After the riot at Pittsburg, Pa., the people everywhere felt the necessity to organize the militia. We have felt the need of it here, and this is a good bill, and he hoped that it would pass.
Mr. GORDON did not think this bill a necessity now. He was opposed to this bill utterly, and he would vote against it.
Mr. THAYER had felt very uncertain what to do upon this question. Look back over the history and see whether it would have paid to have invested, $50,000 per year since the organization of the State to sustain a military organization. He believed there was more danger in men carrying arms than in carrying hoes.
The bill failed to pass the House by--yeas 33, nays 59.
Mr. HANDY, when his name was called, said he had received petition after petition in favor of this measure and would therefore vote "aye."
Mr. HART called up the bill [H. R. 82] in relation to foreign express companies, which was read the third time and passed the House by--yeas 76, nays 2.
Mr. HEROD called up his bill [H. R. 351] to authorize justices of the peace to appoint persons to act in their stead in certain cases, which was read the third time.
Mr. SHUTT hoped the bill would pass. As judges had the privilege to appoint a substitute he did not see why a justice should not have the same privileges.
Mr. WORKS objected to the bill because it made the bondsmen of the justice liable for the act of the substitute justice. The bill passed the House by--yeas 54, nays 55.
The bill [H. R. 112] to provide for the election of trustees for the benevolent institutions was taken up, and the Senate amendments thereto were read.
Mr. OVERMEYER moved to further amend by providing that nothing in this act shall affect the present Incumbent in the offices herein named, but such incumbents shall serve out their unexpired term.
The SPEAKER ruled the amendment out of order on the ground that no amendment to the original bill was now in order; amendment to the Senate amendments would be entertained, but no amendments to the original bill would be in order.
The Senate amendments were then concurred in by--yeas 55, nays 39.
Mr. Herod's joint resolution for the surrender of the charter of the Woodburn Sarven Wheel company was passed by--yeas 75,nays 9.
Mr. HESS called up his bill [H. R. 11] to amend the act authorizing county commissioners to construct gravel roads, which was read the third time and passed the House by--yeas 63, nays 20.
The House then adjourned by--yeas 49, nays 32.
The minutes of yesterday were not read.
On motion by Mr. POINDEXTER, his bill, [S. 374] a Clarksville town legalizing act, was read the third time and passed by yeas 31, nays 1.
On motion by Mr. HARRIS the bill, [H. R. 24] to regulate the indebtedness of counties having a voting population of over 20,000, was read the third time, and after explanation by Mr. HARRIS, that it applied only to Marion county, was to limit indebtedness, was anxiously desired by all citizens thereof, etc., it passed the Senate by yeas 33, nays 1.
Mr. BENZ moved to take up the bill, [H. R. 12] to legalize acts of trustees of Seymour.
Mr. KENT moved to amend by inscribing H. R.--55.
Mr. VIEHE moved to amend the amendment by adding H. R.--56.
Mr. REEVE said he hoped the amendments would not prevail.
The senator from Crawford [Mr. Benz] had asked no favor this session. Many members had been favored with suspension of rules, and their local measures been passed; now, as the session has been mainly taken up in passing local measures there is a rank injustice in refusing to favor members having such bills who have asked for hearing and not been heard. The session is, in. fact, ended. There is no time to consider bills of importance. If the people are unwilling that time shall be given for the Legislature to carefully prepare, consider and perfect laws then they have no right to complain that no laws or inefficient laws are passed. The executive has power to recall the Legislature to perfect legislation, and time can then be taken to consider important bills; the remaining time of the session had best be used in clearing the calendar of all local measures and leave us to a special session without more hindrance, for merely local benefit of individuals. Every member whose local law has been passed should blush to refuse leave for like favor to any other member asking it. Having secured the passage of their own local bills they should be willing other members shall have like favor.
Mr. GARRIGUS stated that in the first days of the session he introduced a bill which he has been trying to get through the Senate, but like the following of a jack-o'-lantern or will-0'-the-wisp, he had been unable to obtain its passage.
The amendments were declared out of order, and Mr. BENZ'S motion being agreed to, the bill, H. R. 12, was read the third time and passed by yeas 42, nays 2.
Mr. HART moved to take up another local bill, H. R. 303.
Mr. KENT moved to amend by taking up House bills on the third reading, which was agreed to.
The bill [H. R. 9] regulating the setting of corner stones or monuments in public roads or highways was read the third time and passed by--yeas 38, nays 7--being opposed by Mr. REEVE aid favored by Mr. COFFEY.
Mr. WINTERBOTHAM, from the
Mr. FOWLER moved to print 100 copies and make this bill the special order for 4 o'clock this afternoon.
Mr. MENZIES ordinarily would be opposed to undue haste, but the bill is short, its provisions clear, and at this late hour it should not be postponed beyond 2 o'clock this afternoon.
Mr. HARRIS regarded the bill as one of great simplicity, and thought it a waste of money to have it printed.
Mr. REEVE examined the substitute bill with care, and declaring it unconstitutional, thought its consideration out of order. He moved to non-concur in the report of the committee.
The motion was rejected by--yeas 14, nays 31, and the motion to print, etc., was agreed to.
Mr. MENZIES, from the
Mr. HARRIS: This is a measure of great importance to the people. There was a time when no interest was allowed at all, but we have made progress in this matter and we now put the question of the hire of money on the same footing with the hire of other property. There ought to be some provision made for the citizens of this State who have their property mortgaged, and to that end he would like to see inserted a provision that the borrower may renew his loan at any rate not exceeding eight per cent.
Mr. MENZIES explained that the mortgagee would, give extension rather than take a judgment, which, under this bill, would draw but six per cent.
Mr. STREIGHT disliked to see any provision adopted restricting the rate of interest below what money can be obtained for. Unfortunately the debtor class is much the largest in this State, and this measure will greatly oppress that class.
Mr. WINTERBOTHAM opposed concurrence in the report of the conference committee. It is supposed there are $40,000,O0O in loans of Eastern capital in this State. Can those thus oppressed in this State be relieved by this law? It is preposterous to think so. If this measure is passed and this burden is imposed upon the people, those voting for it will be buried so deep there will be no resurrection for them.
Mr. REEVE--This is not a question of interest, but a question of the rights and privileges of the people of the State; the legal rate of interest has all along been 6 per cent. A law was placed in the statute book allowing the citizen to examine his judgment as to what he may pay for the use of money, not exceeing the rate of 10 per cent., but the State has been in the miserable, contemptible, puerile position of allowing a man to pay an illimitable sum to Forbear or stay an execution, yet prohibiting him from paying any sum he sees fit for money with which to pay off that execution. The Legislature has no more power to say that a citizen shall not go into the market to make a special contract to meet his own necessities upon one subject any more than another.
Mr. HEFRON was willing to accept this report as the next best thing that can be obtained, having fought as well as he could for a straight 6 per cent. law.
Mr. OLDS: You might as well expect water to run up bill as to expect capital to come to this State with a 7 per cent. limit, when all States adjoining allow a greater rate to be given. Such a measure as the one proposed would be ruinous to the property of the State. The majority of the people will be found against it, and he hoped the report of this committee will be voted down and the bill heretofore passed the Senate adhered to. In that bill those demanding a lower rate were met half way, and yet they insist on still further concession.
The Senate refused to concur in the report of the conference committee by--yeas 22, nays 24--as follows:
Those who voted in the affirmative were--Messrs. Benz, Briscoe, Burrell, Coffey, Donham, Foster, Fowler, Hart, Hefron, Kent, Kramer, Leeper, Major, Menzies, Peterson, Ragan, Reiley, Tarlton, Traylor, Urmston, Wood and Woollen--22.
Those who voted in the negative were--Messrs. Cadwallader, Comstock, Davenport, Davis, Dice, Garrigus, Grubbs, Harris, Kahlo, Langdon, Mercer, Moore, Olds, Poindexter, Reeves, Sarnighausen, Shaffer, Smith, Streight, Taylor, Treat, Weir, Wilson and Winterbotham--24.
Mr. SHIRK, would vote "aye," but was paired with Mr. Trusler.
Messrs. GRUBBS, STREIGHT and TRAYLOR explain ad their votes.
Then came the recess till 2 o'clock.
Mr. REEVE offered a resolvution, which was adopted, requesting the appointment by the House of Representatives of another committee of conference on the interest bill, S. 277, and requesting the Senate, if possible, to agree on a bill allowing 8 per cent. on contract, and 6 per cent on judgments.
The LIEUTENANT GOVERNOR appointed as such committee, on the part of the Senate, Messrs. Reeve and Hefron. Mr. Reeve declining, Mr. Kramer was substituted instead.
The bill [H. R. 14] to amend section 1 of the private cemetery act of March 9,1875, was read the third time, and passed the Senate by yeas 45, nays 0.
The bill [H. R. 15] legalizing acts of Edinburg town was read the third time, and passed the Senate by yeas 46, nays 1.
The bill [H. R. 55] to legalize certain acts of commissioners of Clinton county,was read the third time and passed by--yeas 45, nays 0.
The bill [H. R. 56] defining the twelfth and tenth judicial circuits, was read the third time and passed by--yeas, 40, nays 1.
The bill [H. R. 122] supplemental to the act authorizing cities and towns to issue bonds to pay debts contracted for school purposes, was read the third rime and failed to pass by--yeas 23, nays 18--for want of a constitutional majority.
The bill [H. R. 158] in relation to settlements by county boards with school officers--shall not be conclusive if the officer be a defaulter--was taken up, with a favorable committee report thereon.
Mr. MOORE moved a substitute for the committee report, by adding to section 1 these words: "Whether received by way of certificate of deposit, bill, draft, note, check or any other evidence of indebtednesss "
Mr. REEVE opposed the passage of the bill, declaring it would give more trouble than members now dream of--there is a cat in this meal tub. There is a bid in it to every treasurer who wants to play the scoundrel, to make mistakes. It is an evil bill, in the interest of a few who wish to escape the results of their own wrong and their own neglect.
Mr. MOORE said this bill has been assailed by a charge that it is in the interest of
those in this city who desire to make a raid on the treasury. No one in this county
knew of it till after it was drafted and brought here. The original, as introduced in
the House by Representative March, contained but the clause. Ours is, perhaps, the
only State in the Union which has established the rule of a bar to these actions,
which rule is simply infamous. Instead of this bill being a bill in the interest of
those contemplating raids on the treasury, it is in the interest of people who have
suffered by having their funds dishonestly withheld. The proviso to the bill was added
by
When he had concluded--
Mr. WINTERBOTHAM called up the special order, being the bill [H. R. 637] to provide means for the construction of the new State House, which was read with the report of the committee as described in these reports this a. m.
Mr. REEVE offerred a substitute for the report of the committee, levying a tax of three cents on each $100 for the year 1879, and a like tax for the year 1880. He said such a building as the proposed State House should not be completed under eight years--if constructed in much less time, is a 12 month thereafter it would be an unsightly structure.
Mr. HARRIS believed it, a desire of a great majority of the people that the State House shall be completed in a seasonable time. This is an opportune time to furnish work for laboring men ; a tax of 3 per cent is not a burdensome tax in usual times, and he could see no constitutional objection to the report of the committee.
Mr. TREAT favored the substitute, and desired the State House completed at as early a day as practicable. He was conscientiously against any measure for the issuing of bonds, being satisfied the constitutional objection urged by the senator from Marshall [Mr. Reeve] was well founded. The precedent would be dangerous, unwarrantable and monstrous.
Mr. BURRELL also favored the substitute as part of the original plan on which it was proposed to build the State House. The promise being made that there should be no additional expense, as by the way of paying interest, on bonds. The constitutional objection was in the way of passing the bill.
Mr. BRISCOE was in favor of building such a State House as would be a credit, for centuries to come, but he objected to the large appropriation made in the bill. He was willing to vote $500,000, believing that as much as should be expanded in two years.
Mr. WINTERBOTHAM believed the amendments proposed by the committee were proper and right. Some of the ablest constitutional lawyers in the State have decided these measures within the scope and meaning of that instrument, and he hoped these objections will not influence members to vote against the report.
Mr. HEFRON opposed the bill providing for issue of bonds, though not desiring to throw anything in the way of the completion of the State House. The act itself declares that no money shall be used except that raised by a tax-levy, and this bill is in direct conflict with that. An expert has testified this building should not be put up in less than seven years, and there is no need of hurrying this work at this time.
Mr. STREIGHT believed the building would be protracted 12 or 15 years it only a 2 per cent, levy is made; and in that time many jobs might arise. The work should be proceeded within a business manner. It costs some $20,000 for yearly incidental expenses, whether the time be short or long, and they can not be curtailed very greatly, until the building is completed.
And then the Senate adjourned.
Prayer by the Representative from Hancock, Mr. HANDY.
The part of the journal recording the proceedings on the legislative apportionment bill [H. R. 349] was read and approved.
On the motion of Mr. OVERMEYER the rules were suspended, and the specific appropriation bill [H. R. 640] was taken up, read the third time and passed by yeas 72, nays 8.
On the motion of Mr. SAINT the order of business was further suspended so that the
report of the
The report was read and on the motion of Mr. MIERS the report was recommitted with instructions to report an amendment to allow the committee to sit for 15 days after the adjournment of the General Assembly.
Mr. HOPKINS called up Mr Gordon's bill [H. R. 89] touching contempts of court, which was read the third time.
Mr. WILLARD said the bill proposed to limit the amount of time by the judge for contempt of court, and also as to the length of time for imprisonment, shall not be for longer term than three months. It limits the fine to $500, and in case the fine reaches the sum of $50, it gives the right of appeal. He hoped the bill would pass.
Mr. MIERS opposed that part of the bill which would restrict the judge to a $500 fine; it seems to him it makes the limit too small, and for that reason he would be compelled to vote against the bill.
The bill then passed the House of Representatives by--yeas 64, nays 23.
Mr. HOSMER called up the bill [S. 27] to provide for the government and discipline of the State prisons, etc., which was read the third time, together with the amendments thereto.
Mr. SCHOLL moved to strike out of the amendment mat clause which prevents the contractor from giving presents to convicts as a reward for their good conduct. Objection being made--
Mr. WILLARD moved to recommit the bill with instructions to strike out that section, as he could not support the bill unless that amendment was stricken out.
Mr. TAYLOR, of Davis, would never vote for this bill, and hoped it would never become a law.
Mr. TULLEY said these little gifts would be an Incentive to mutiny to those who did not get, them, and they were given in order that the contractor might get more work out of the convict.
Mr. DRAKE thought it unchristian for the law to step in and prohibit acts of kindness to convicts.
Mr. OSBORNE, of Elkhart. thought the prisoner should be encouraged, and he hoped this bill would not be killed, bat would go to the committee and be amended.
Mr. EDWINS, as a member of the prison committee, was in favor of the men being allowed to do extra work, as they were thus enabled to obtain such articles as they required and in his judgment needed. He favored the passage of the bill thus amended.
Mr. OWEN said that these prisoners were certainly happier when working for these incentives, and he hoped the amendment prohibiting them would be stricken out.
Mr. TULLEY then withdrew his objection, and the amendment was adopted.
The bill then passed as amended by--yeas 90, nays 0.
Mr. CONNER called up his bill [H. R. 20] providing for a bureau of statistics, it having failed to pass heretofore for want of a constitutional majority, and it finally passed the House by yeas 68, nays 18.
Mr. HUBBARD called up the bill [H. R. 69] to provide for the organization and support of an asylum for feeble-minded children, which was read the third time.
Mr. Hubbard said such an institution as the one contemplated by this bill is much needed. There are over 1,000 of this unfortunate class in our State, who, if not provided for by an institution of this kind, are destined to remain as they long have been, not only a public charge and a burden to society, but a burthen that hangs with crushing weight upon the heart of every parent whose misfortune it is to have an idiotic or feeble minded child. There are 50 such institutions in the world, all of which are in the United States. It is proposed to locate this institution at the Soldier' Orphans' Home, near Knightstown. The present buildings are new and commodious, with about 56 acres of ground attached. He trusted the provisions of this bill are so humane that every member on this floor will be proud of the opportunity to cast his vote for it. You now have a grand privilege of extending a helping hand to these unfortunate wards of the State, and in so doing call down upon you the blessing of Him who hath said: "He that giveth a cup of water in my name to one these 'little ones' shall receive his reward."
Mr. VANPELT doubted the propriety of opening out an institution of this kind at this time and he protested against it. He did not think a fool could be educated anyhow. It would be too expensive and he was opposed to it.
The bill finally passed by yeas 61, nays 26.
Then came the recess till two o'clock.
Mr. HUMPHREYS called up the congressional apportionment bill [H. R. 486], which was read the third time.
A call upon the House was ordered and taken, which discovered 67 members present, when--
ON the motion of Mr. LEHMAN the doors were closed and the absentees sent for.
Pending the call of the House--
The
The report of the conference committee on the interest bill S. 277--see Senate proceedings--being read--
Mr. Overmeyer moved ineffectually to lay the report of the conference committee on the table--yeas 36, nays 60.
The report of the committee was concurred in.
A message from the Senate transmitting a resolution asking for a second committee of conference on this interest bill being read--
Mr. OSBORNE, of Elkhart, offered a resolution, which was adopted, for the appointment of a committee as requested by the Senate.
On the motion by Mr. HUMPHREYS further proceedings under the call were dispensed with.
Under a demand for the previous question the congressional apportionment bill [H. R. 486] failed to pass the House by yeas 49, nays 49.
Mr. HUTHSTEINER called up Mr. Gordon's insurance bill [H. R. 380] which was read the third time.
On the motion of Mr. MIERS the motion heretofore made to reconsider the vote by which the bill was ordered engrossed was laid on the table.
Mr. ALLEN on Putnam opposed this bill because the law now in force was much better than the one now proposed. He was in favor of semi-annual publication of the condition of the companies. He would prefer quarterly publications.
Mr. WORKS said it seems that some gentlemen believe a man can not be an insurance agent and be honest. Although he was not an insurance agent, and had no more interest in such companies than any other gentleman on the floor of the House, he believed it was our duty to do justice to foreign insurance companies as much as to any citizen of the State. It has been said that the law we now have is a good one. He did not think so. He believed a more infamous law never found its way into a statute. The state auditor has placed such a construction upon the present law that he collects all additional fees and puts them into his own pocket, paying nothing into the State treasury. None of the safeguards now thrown around these foreign insurance companies are removed by this bill, except the single one of requiring them to publish the semi-annual statement. The opposition to this bill is only in the interest of the newspapers. It cuts off several thousand dollars of their printing, and hence their strong opposition to the bill.
Mr. WILLARD said there was always with the Legislature two lobbies--the insurance and the railroad. The insurance lobby was here now. If a man wants to see if he is insured safely he must look at the published statements of the condition of his company. There was not but 120 foreign insurance companies in the State, and he atributed that fact to the publication of the condition of the companies every six months. If they are in good condition they need not be afraid to publish these statements.
Mr. LINDLEY said the friends of the bill under consideration seem to argue from the standpoint that the publication of the statements of foreign insurance companies is to be considered in the light of an endowment for the support of certain newspapers instead of a means of protection to the people. Such publication furnishes a great safeguard to the people from the impositions formerly practiced upon them by the many irresponsible agents who have filched so many hard-earned dollars from the people without rendering an equivalent. We hear on all hands the cry of "Hard times." the solution of which lies largely in the fact that for years we of the West have emptied a large part of our hard earned means into the laps of insurance companies of the East. He did not think it a hardship to compel these companies to pay back a part of these monies in such a manner as to protect ourselves from imposition.
Mr. OVERMEYER knew large sums of money had been taken from insurance companies wrongfully under the present law. All he saw in this bill was that the insurance companies wanted to get rid of semi-annual publication of statements. Let us reject this bill, and then repeal the objectionable clause in the law of 1877. Under the operations of the previous question the bill failed to pass by yeas 10, nays 81.
Mr. THAYER, explaining his negative vote, said he believed that under the present law
our citizens are much better protected from loss by failure of foreign insurance
companies than they are from insurance companies organized under our laws within our
own State;
The vote was then announced as above.
Mr. JOHNSON called up the bill [H. R. 578] for the relief of Jno. E,. Robins, which was read the third time and passed by--yeas 88 nays 4.
Mr. KELLY called up the bill [S. 382] concerning aid to railroads [see Senate reports, Feb. 15, a. m.], which was reed the third time and passed the House by--yeas 81, nays 12.
Mr. CUNNINGHAM moved to reconsider the vote on the congressional apportionment bill [H. R. 486], which, after the rejection of general motions to adjourn,and numerous other dilatory motions, was agreed to--yeas 56, nays 43--and the bill, under the operations of the previous question, again failed to pass--yeas 50, nays 49--for want of a constitutional majority.
Pending the roll call--
Mr. BAKER, in explanation, said: He was in favor of a fair and just apportionment to all parties, and so believing could not vote for this bill against his conciousness of what is right and wrong. He had no objections to being placed in a Republican district if there was any justice in this bill. He did hate to vote against his party, but could not sacrifice his convictions as to what is justice in this matter. He would therefore ask his Democratic friends to excuse him this time for voting "no."
Mr. MAJOR in explanation, said: That while he should not support the bill he had steadily voted at every stage to bring this House to a vote on the main question, because he was unalterably opposed to filibustering. He believed in the right of the majority to rule and would hold them responsible for their actions. He therefore voted "no."
Mr. THOMPSON, when his name was called, in explanation of his vote, said: He could not vote for the passage of this bill, because it was unfair, and he would not shirk his individual responsibility upon the Senate by voting to send an imperfect bill to that body for amendment. He therefore voted "no."
The vote was amended as above recorded.
The House at 6:50 p. m. adjourned.
The minutes of yesterday were not read.
On motion by Mr. GARRIGUS, his bill [S. 55] to legalize the Kokomo Building association and its acts,was read the third time and passed by--yeas 43, nays 2.
On motion by Mr. PETERSON, the bill [H. R. 578] for the relief of John R. Robinson, late a township trustee,was read the first, second and third times, under a dispensation of the constitutional restriction, and passed the Senate by--yeas 39, nays 3.
On motion by Mr. SARNIGHAUSEN the bill [H. R. 122] supplemental to the act of March 3,1873, authorizing cities and towns to sell bonds to pay indebtedness incurred for school purposes, was read the third time and passed by--yeas 41, nays 2.
On motion by Mr. DAVENPORT, his bill [S. 21] to amend the act approved March 12, 1875, so as to authorize the establishment of courts in cities of 6,000 Inhabitants and upward, was read the third time and passed by--yeas 40, nays 2.
On motion by Mr. MERCER, the bill [H. R. 231] to legalize the incorporation of Auburn and the official acts thereof, was read the second time, and under a dispensation of the constitutional rule intended to restrict hasty legislation--by yeas 41, nays 7--the bill was read the third time and passed by--yeas 43, nays 2.
On motion by Mr. SMITH the bill, [H. R. 560] for the relief of John J. Justice et al. late trustee of township, was read the first time. On his further motion the constitutional restriction was removed by yeas 38, nays 8, and the bill read the second time.
Mr. REEVE opposed this bill because it provides for the issuing of a license to every official holding public funds, to deposit the public moneys wherever he pleases, and the legislature will relieve him of all loss occasioned, by the exercise of unsound judgment, or no judgment, or a corrupt judgment.
Mr. MENZIES moved to indefinitely postpone this bill.
Mr. HEFRON understood there was a just principle in this bill, and urged careful consideration of its provisions that injustice may not be done to any citizen of the State.
Mr. MENZ1ES insisted there was nothing right in this bill; if every tax-payer in the township were willing, its passage would be a dangerous precedent. He was tired of these legalizing and creative bills, and now was a good time to stop.
Mr. SMITH, in principle, opposed indiscriminate legislation of any kind; but where loss has overtaken an officer, through no fraud or misconduct, and relief is sought here, it is well enough to grant it. Discrimination should be made in favor of parties who are suffering from a great in misfortune. The facts in this case, as stated in the bill and on this floor, are these: This man, under the advice of others, placed in a bank--the securest place possible--the moneys of the township. That bank failed, and he, being a poor man, loses the money. The only question is, whether this Legislature will aid him in his misfortune? It is the universal sentiment of the township where the money was lost that this restoration may be made to him by the Legislature. The facts in this case he [Mr. Smith] had been unacquainted with till a few moments ago, bat he believed in this case the Senate should confirm the action of the House by extending the relief asked for to this applicant, who he understood to be a poor man.
Mr. VIEHE believed this kind of legislation to be vicious in its consequences, because if these precedents are established we do not know where this thing will end. This bill comes in here, and in less than an hour it is endeavored to pass it into a law.
Mr. TRAYLOR: The Senate has again resolved itself into an appellate court. Men are getting in the habit of appealing from the courts to the General Assembly such legislation is disgraceful to the State, and it is a disgrace to put such acts on the statute books.
Mr. WOOD favored the passage of this bill. He held no prejudice against legalizing
legislation or releasing acts. He desired to examine each bill in the spirit of a judge
deciding a cause. He way entirely opposed to the rule that would say all blunders or
mistakes shall
Mr. KRAMER knew nothing about the circumstances in this case, and deprecated a hasty favorable disposition of it.
Mr. BRISCOE: This may be a dangerous class of legislation, but there are exceptions, and some senators say this is a meritorious case.
The bill was referred to the
On motion by Mr. HARRIS the general appropriation bill [H. R. 592] was taken up.
Then came the recess "bill 2 o'clock.
On motion by Mr. BURRELL a report from the conference committee on the legislative apportionment bill [H. R. 340] was submitted, read, and after the exhaustion of the operations of one previous question, the report was concurred in under the operation of another previous question by--yeas 26, nays 23.
On motion by Mr. HEFRON--yeas 29, nays 20--the House amendments to the bill [S. 27] for the government of State prisons were read.
Mr. WINTERBOTHAM explained the House amendments, and moved that they be concurred in.
Mr. HEFRON submitted the report of the second committee of conference on the interest bill [S. 277], with amendments making the legal rate 6 per cent, on contracts 8, and on judgments 6; the forfeiture is usurious interest above the legal rate; which was concurred in by--yeas 43, nays 4. ;
Pending the roll call
Mr. Dice when his name was called, said he could not vote to concur, because judgment will only bear six per cent. into interest--if the creditor compel the lender to bring suit to recover his money he should receive interest at the rate of the original contract.
Mr. FOSTER in explanation said: Having done all he possibly could to get a six per cent law, he would accept this as the best that can be had.
Mr. HART when his name was called, in explanation of his vote said: Believing the people demand a six percent, law, but as this seems to be the only thing we can get, he would vote "aye."
Mr. SHIRK in explanation of his vote said: He had been steadily in favor of a 6 per cent. law, and a law declaring that judgments shall bear the same rate of interest as the original contract; but considering this the best that can now be obtained, should vote "aye."
Mr. WOOLLEN when his name was called, said he had done what he could to obtain a 6 per cent. law, because his constituency demanded it, yet as this will reduce the present rate 2 per cent., he would vote "aye."
Mr. WITHERBOTHAM in explanation of his vote said: He was in favor of the lowest rate that can be obtained, as it is impossible otherwise to renew paper about to mature, and pay taxes, and it is with a view to get the cheapest money possible he favored this measure.
The vote was then announced as above.
Mr. HARRIS moved to return to the consideration of the general appropriation bill.
Mr. URMSTON made an ineffectual motion--yeas 27, nays 19--to take up the Metropolitan Police bill.
Mr. REEVE moved to amend the motion [Mr. Harris'] by substituting the State House bill, which motion was agreed to by consent.
Mr LANGDON offered a resolution declaring that for more than a year past there has been a surplus in the State Treasury of $250,000, etc, and referring the bill H. R. 637 to a special committee of three with instructions to report a substitute appropriating $20O,000 of said surplus, for 1879, and levying a tax of 2 per cent. for the years 1879 and 1880, for State House purposes.
Mr. REEVE stated there is no surplus in the treasury--the apprehension grows out of the way the books are kept. There is but one State in the union that levies a lower tax than Indiana. He submitted a mass of figures to show the importance of adopting his amendment to this bill proposed yesterday.
Mr LANDON understood from the monthly statements setting forth that there is a cash balance in the treasury, that there is actually there the amounts of cash represented by these reports to be there. Running back over a space of two years, according to the published statements, there has never been for an hour less than $400,000 in money in the public treasury of the State. Of this sum his resolution proposed to devote $200,000 to the purposes of building the State House. He favored the plan of paying as you go, especially when we have a treasury full and overflowing.
Mr. VIEHE addressed his remarks to the constitutional objection to the bill under consideration, regarding it as well founded.
Mr. TREAT also regarded the proposition to raise money by the issuing of bonds as unconstitutional.
Mr. HARRIS was authorized by the treasurer of state to say that, $200,000 may he appropriated and can be paid into the State House fund from time to time this year. He offered an amendment increasing the levy from 2 to 3 per cent. for 1879 and for 1880.
Mr. STREIGHT thought it clear that unless this work is prosecuted as it should be, the commissioners had batter be instructed to close their office and cover up the foundations of the State House. This difference of opinion as to what amount of money is in the treasury does not probably amount to much. He hoped the building would be proceeded with in a business-like way--not too hasty, and yet not so slow as that it shall so out that this great State is not able to build a State House. He would not ask for an unreasonable tax to hurry on this building. He moved that the bill and pending amendments be referred to a special committee.
The resolution [Mr. Langdon's] was agreed to by yeas 41, nays 6.
A message from the House of Representatives announced [at 5 o'clock p. m. ] The passage by that body of the congressional apportionment bill [H. R. 486].
Mr. GRUBBS moved to take up the general appropriation bill.
Mr. MENZIES moved that the Senate proceed to the consideration of the bill just reported from the House [H. R. 486].
Mr. GRUBBS made an ineffectual motion--yeas 22, nays 27--to lay this motion on the table.
Mr. STREIGHT hoped the Senate would take up the general appropriation bill and
proceed with its consideration. There are but two days left for legislation, and the
business of the State should be attended to instead of passing a gerrymandering bill
to hand the
Mr. BURRELL raised the point of order that the senator had exceeded the time allowed under the ten minute rule by some five or 10 minutes.
On motion Mr. Streight had leave to proceed with his remarks, which he did until Mr. BURRELL again raised the point of order, this time declaring that the senator from Marion [Mr. Streight] had occupied 20 minutes instead of ten since the motion was agreed to extending his time.
The LIEUTANT GOVERNOR sustained the point of order.
Mr. DICE made an ineffectual motion--yeas 26, nays 21--that the senator from Marion [Mr. Streight) be allowed to proceed with his speech.
After two ineffectual motions by Messrs. SHAFFER and STREIGHT--yeas 23, nays 24 to adjourn, the previous question was demanded by Mr. BURRELL, and under its operations the congressional apportionment bill,[H. R. 486] was read the first time and referred to the committee on congressional apportionment.
On motion by Mr. URMSTON the bill, [H. R. 22] providing for a homestead and personal property exemption--$1,000--was read the first time and referred to a special committee of three, with instructions to report tomorrow morning at 1O o'clock.
On motion by Mr. KAHLO the bill, [H. R. 195] for the relief of the estate of John T. Bishop et al , sureties on bonds of a late township trustee, was read the first time.
The Senate then adjourned.
Reading of the journal was omitted.
Mr. OVERMEYER moved for a suspension of the order of business that he might offer a resolution, which he read for information.
Mr OSBORNE, of Elkhart, and Mr. DRAKE opposed the resolution on the ground that the opposition had stood in the way of business day after day with dilatory motions.
Mr. OVERMEYER a had never dodged any vote, but was willing to, and did go on the record. The important measures of this General Assembly had been put through on his motions. Nothing but political measures had absorbed the attention of the majority in this House thus far, and when he now offered a resolution in opposition to an extra session gentlemen get up here and talk about demagoguery.
Mr. MARCH: said this looked to him like a tempest in a tea pot and he did not think this resolution had anything to do in calling an extra session. He would vote for it under protest.
Th House agreed to suspend the rule by yeas 51, nays 30, and Mr. Overmeyer's resolution was then read as follows:
Whereas, The appropriation bills are all parsed the House of Representatives, and
Whereas, Said bills can easily be completed before the end of this session, and
Whereas, There is no necessity for a special session; therefore
Resolved by the House, the Senate concurring. That it is the duty of the General Assembly to complete said appropriation bills at once to the end that no special session shall be called.
The SPEAKER ruled the resolution out of order, as the subject matter was not within the purview of this House.
Mr. OVERMEYER and Mr. GOLDEN appealed from the decision of the chair.
The decision of the chair was sustained by yeas 58, nays 37.
The
Mr. OSBORNE, of Elkhart, submitted the report of the special
Mr. MARCH did not think that 8 per cent. was a sufficient reduction. He did not see that there was much to be gained by the passage of this bill.
Mr. HUMPHREY said the opposition to the 6 per cent. interest clause came from the Republican side of the House. The House committee got all they could in their conference. He thought this bill better than the old law.
Mr. MITCHELL said in this report there was a compromise that was not right. He wanted to hold out as he began for a six per cent. law.
Mr. REED said the question was: Do we prefer this bill reported by the
Mr. SAINT said the report emasculated every feature in the bill that recommended it to the people. He thought there should be no compromise. and he thought that the House ought not to back down, and for one he did not intend to.
Mr. DAILEY said this was an improvement of the old law. It becomes our duty as representatives to do the best we could, and he was in favor of concurring in the report of the committee.
The report of the committee was then concurred in by--yeas 76, nays 22.
Mr. ENGLISH, from the
On the motion of Mr. 0VERMEYER, the amendments proposed by the
The
The
On the motion of Mr. OVERMEYER the rules were suspended--yeas 64, nays 32--in order that the amendments may be considered. engrossed, the bill read the third time, and put upon its passage.
The bill being read the third time--
Mr. WILLARD moved ineffectually to lay the bill upon the table--yeas 32, nays 64.
Mr. WILLARD then moved to strike out the enacting clause, which motion was rejected by yeas 18, nays 64.
Mr. BRIGGS demanded the previous question upon the passage of the bill.
Mr. WILLARD moved to lay the demand upon the table, which was rejected by yeas 21, nays 76.
After several dilatory motions and roll calls--
The bill finally passed the House of Representatives by yeas 77, nays 21.
The House took up the bill [H. R. 195] for the relief of the sureties of R. K. Rea, trustee of Washington township, Cass county, which was read the third time and passed the House by yeas 88, nays 0.
The House then took a recess until 2 o'clock.
Mr. OVERMEYER moved that the roll be called, beginning with the letter ' K," and as the name of each member is called he may call up either a Senate or a House bill that has not yet been acted upon on the third reading.
Mr. HUMPHREYS moved ineffectually--yeas 47, nays 47--to lay the motion on the table.
The resolution was then rejected--yeas 42 nays 52.
On the motion of Mr. FAULKNER the business on the Speaker's table was taken up.
A message from the Senate announcing the passage of concurrent resolution No. 23, that the governor surrender to the owner any claim on file in his office with the evidence, etc, before the Morgan Raid Commissioners, was read and adopted.
The bill [S. 374] to amend the charter of Clarkville, etc., was read the first time and passed to the second reading.
The bill [S. 442] regulating elections was read the second time.
Mr. OVERMEYER moved that the constitutional rule be suspended, that the bill may be considered engrossed, read the third time now and put upon its passage.
Mr. WILLARD moved ineffectually--yeas 49, nays 49--to lay the motion on the table.
Mr. Overmeyer's motion was then rejected yeas 48, nays 47--and the bill was passed to the third reading.
The Senate resolution to authorize the appointment by the Governor, Auditor and Secretary of State of a suitable person to survey and plat certain lands belonging to the State, reclaimed by the drainage of Beaver and English lake and the Kankakee and Calumet river, was read and adopted by yeas 67, nays 28.
Mr. OVERMEYER moved to reconsider the vote by which the concurrent resolution was adopted.
Mr. SAINT moved to lay the motion to reconsider on the table, which resulted--yeas 48, nays 39.
Senate bills 392, 28, 55 and 313 were read the first time and severally passed to the second reading.
Mr. OWEN moved for the suspension of the order of business that the bill[H. R. 22] for a homestead exemption law be taken up and put upon its passage.
Mr. KIRKPATRICK moved to lay the motion upon the table, which was agreed to by yeas 49, nays 48.
Mr. HUMPHREYS called up the bill [H. R. 486] for congressional apportionment, which failed to pass yesterday for want of a constitutional majority.
Mr OVERMEYER demanded a call of the House. The call proceeded until--
Mr. BRIGGS moved that further proceedings under the call be dispensed with.
Mr. OVERMEYER moved to lay the motion upon the table, and on that, motion he demanded the yens and nays, which, being taken, resulted, yeas 23, nays 59; so the motion was rejected.
Mr. Brigg's motion that further proceedings under the call be dispensed With, was then agreed to.
Mr. OVERMEYER (under a unanimous agreement that a half hour should be devoted to the discussion of this bill, and then it should go without objection to its final passage), said. The passing of this bill now is simply revolutionary, and would allow an apportionment of the State every two years, There was never a more ridiculous apportionment made than the one proposed in this bill.
Mr. GORDON wanted to speak for himself and for no party. He did not think the Democratic party had a fair representation in the last apportionment by the Republican party. The apportionment proposed in this bill he denounced most infamous. He did not expect a worse apportionment than the one made by Republicans years ago, and was sorry to have to say that this one is the most unjust of the two.
Mr. THOMPSON desired to make a personal explanation as well as to sustain his party. He defied any one to point a finger to the time or word when he had censured his party for this apportionment. Neither the newspapers nor the Democratic party could dig a political grave for him. It takes now under the Republican gerrymandering of the State 53,000 Democrats to elect one congressman and but 23,000 Republicans. This bill was not his choice for an apportionment, and he withheld his vote from it until he had obtained the promise of senators that the bill would be amended in certain objectionable particulars.
Mr. THAYER said as to the apportionment bill now under consideration, he did not have words of sufficient condemnation to express himself, and he would surrender.
Mr. SHANKS hoped after this discussion there would be the best of feeling, and if this thing goes on much longer he would call for the passage of the military bill.
Mr. SLEETH said he could not have the boldness to denounce the Democratic party, individually or collectively, as infamous, and he was surprised to hear any one denounce the Republican party for making an apportionment that requires 53,000 Democrats to elect one congressman when this bill takes 60,000 Republicans to elect one congressman.
Mr. ALLEN of Putnam would vote for the bill now, believing that the Senate would amend it. and for the reason that he wanted a fair redistricting of the State.
Mr. BRIGGS said it seemed to him that this bill was much more fair than the one of 1872. Take the two maps together and this bill to-day is white and pure beside the other
Mr. SAINT: It was at first difficult to make up his mind as to this apportionment bill, and he did not know but he was getting in favor of irregular lines; but comparad with the one now in operation it looked rather favorable.
The bill then passed the House by--yeas 54, nays 46--as follows:
Yeas--Messrs. Alden, Allen, Baker, Barker, Blockley, Briggs, Bryant, Caldwell, Compton, Confer, Cunningham, Dailey, Dalton, Davidson, Drake, Drover, Edwins, English, Faulkner, Fleming, Flodder, Galbraith, Garroutte, Ginz, Handy, Hart, Hosmer, Humphreys, Huthsteiner, Johnston, Kester, Lehman, Miers, Mitchell. Nave, Osborn of Elkhart, Perry, Reicheldafer, Rooker, Saint, Scholl, Schweitzer, Shauck, Shields, Shutt, Stucker, Taylor of Daviess, Taylor of Warrick, Thompson, Tulley, Vanpelt, Van Valzah, Willard, Speaker Cauthorne, H. S.--54.
Nays--Messrs. Arnold of Blackford, Arnold of Wabash, Bearss, Brown of Jasper, Brown of Steuben, Campbell, Carey, Carter. Connoway, Connor, Copeland, Davis, Donnell, Fancher, Golden, Gordon, Harland, Herod, Hess, Hopkins, Hubbard, Kelly, Kirkpatrick, Lindley, Major, March, Messick, Osborn of Vermillion, Overmeyer, Owen, Reed, Robeson, Rodman, Robinson, Shanks. Skinner, Sleeth, Snoddy, Stevens, Taylor of Lagrange, Thayer, Thornburg, Vawter, Watson, Wimmer, Works--46.
Mr. KIRKPATRICK called up his bill [H. R. 383] to legalize the Kokomo Gaslight and Coke company, which, was read the third time, and finally passed the House by yeas 80, nays 0.
Mr. LEHMAN called up the bill [S. 80] to abolish the office of city assessor, which was read the third time and passed the House by yeas 75, nays 3.
Mr. LINDLEY called up his bill [H. R. 207] prescribing the manner and time for the election of supervisor, which was read the third time and passed the House by yeas 57, nays 20.
Mr. MAJOR called up Mr. Conner's bill [H. R. 22] providing for a homestead--$1,000 real, personal or both--which was read the third time and passed the House by yeas 67, nays 14.
Mr. MARSH called up his bill [H. R. 273] prescribing forms of deeds for sheriffs or coroners, which was read the third time and finally passed the House by yeas 83, nays 2.
Mr. MESSICK called up Mr Hess' bill [H. R. 173] authorizing Justices of the peace to certify causes to the superior court in certain cases, which was read the third time and passed the House by--yeas 66, nays 7.
Mr. MIERS called up the bill [S. 207] for determining, allowing and paying claims against the State, etc., which was read the third time.
Mr. Overmeyer moved to recommit the bill to a committee of three, with instructions to amend so that no judgment rendered by the Marion county court under the provisions of this act shall be paid until the Legislature, sitting after the rendition of said judgment, shall have appropriated the money to pay such judgment, and such judgment shall be held conclusive as to the amount of such claim so adjudicated.
The motion was agreed to--yeas 50, nays 34.
The SPEAKER makes this committee to consist of Messrs. Overmeyer, Humphreys and and Miers.
And then the House adjourned.
The minutes were read till on motion by Mr. COMSTOCK the further reading was dispensed with.
On motion by Mr. KAHLO the bill [H. R. 395] for the relief of the estate of John T. Bishop and other sureties on the bond of a late township trustee was taken up, and under a dispensation or the constitutional restriction--yeas 41, nays 1--the bill was read by title only for the second reading. The third time by sections, and passed the Senate by yeas 34 nays 7.
Messrs. HARRIS, URMSTON and COFFEY, explaining their negative votes; While sympathizing with those seeking relief, they could not violate the principle which compelled opposition to this class of legislation.
On motion by Mr. GRUBBS the House substitute for his bill [S. 65] defining libel, was read. He said the bill as originally introduced embraced largely the old common law idea. The substitute proposed by the House is too strict, and rigid in its terms. He moved that the Senate refuse to concur in the House amendment.
Mr. MENZIES was clearly of opinion the bill as originally passed the Senase is going as far as this tate is prepared to go in this direction at this time. It is unwise now to depart from the old common law rule
The Senate refused to concur in the substitute proposed by the House of Representatives
On motion by Mr. VIEHE the House amendments to the bill [S. 399] to provide for submitting the constitutional amendments to a vote of the people, were read and concurred in.
Mr. VIEHE explained: The House amendments do not materially affect the bill as it passed the Senate.
Mr. STREIGHT moved that the Senate proceed to the consideration of the general appropriation bill.
Mr. REEVE moved to amend by substituting the bill 286.
Mr. MENZIES believed from the necessity of circumstances that the General Assembly should have from seven to 10 days more to consider the important measures now so near perfected. Many members seem to be afraid to avow their sentiments upon this subject, but he was willing to assume the responsibility of any vote or action that will bring it about.
Mr. OLDS thought there were but two or three bills necessary to be passed, and then the State will not suffer, even if the fee and salary bill should not be perfected. He insisted on the consideration of the appropriation bills and other necessary measures at once, so as to do away with the need of a special session.
Mr. HARRIS understood this vote will be a test, vote as to whether there shall be a special seesion, or whether the Senate will proceed to take up the few important measures pending and dispose of them before the session expires by the limitation of time. He was not in favor of a special session; did not believe the people of the State want it, but insisted on taking up the more important measures and disposing of them, and then working to-night, all day to-morrow and to-morrow night as best we can. The general appropriation bill will not take long as he understood it. He hoped this would be taken as a test vote, so it may be seen who are in favor of a special session.
Mr. REEVE replied at length, defending his party friends from any blame that may attach because of the necessity for an extra session.
On motion by Mr. WINTERBOTHAM the bill [H. R.
640] making specific appropriations for the purposes therein named, was read the
first time and referred to the
After several ineffectual motions to take up as many different bills, favored by the movers thereof--
Came the recess till 2 o'clock.
On motion by Mr. DICE the bill [H. R. 126] touching foreign corporations and
providing certain acts thereof shall work forfeiture preventing foreign corporations
from transferring suits from the State to foreign courts, nor
Mr. MENZIES stated the bill was drawn in conformity with a decision of the supreme court;the bill in effect saying if these corporations seek to drag citizens hundreds of miles to assert their rights in the courts the companies shall forfeit their right to do business in the State. If they do business here they must stand on the same footing with citizens of the State and submit their differences with citizens to the decision of our State courts.
On motion by Mr. DICE the constitutional restriction was dispensed with--yeas 46, nays 2--the bill read by title only for the second reading, read the third time and passed the Senate by yeas 47, nays 1.
Mr. REEVE explained his negative vote--fearing the bill is left so as to produce a conflict of jurisdiction.
Mr. LANGDON submitted a report from the select committee thereon, returning the State House bill[H. R. 639] with amendments appropriating $200,000 for construction purposes, to be used in the year 1879--$100,000 before May 1, and $100,000 before August 1, 1879, and proposing a tax of 3 per cent.
Mr. STREIGHT understood this draft can be made on the treasury without crippling it. Money must be appropriated to carry on this building, or it must be stopped altogether.
Mr. COMSTOCK moved to reduce the proposed levy from "three" to "two" cents.
Mr. HEFRON moved, as a substitute, an amendment, providing a levy or two cents for 1879 and three cents for 1880. Whenever the attempt is made to increase taxation, it ought to be carefully and judiciously made. He desired to gradually increase the tax, so that, by the time the Legislature meets in 1881, $600,000 may have been expended on the work.
The substitute was rejected.
Mr. FOWLER moved to substitute an amendment which would appropriate $100,000 for 1879, $200,000 for 1880, and make the levy "two" per cent. He believed this would meet the requirement, of the State House commissioners. The levy proposed will produce probably $160,000 for these years. Suppose there is a reassessment; it would bring down the revenue, but conceding that the State can not afford to make too large an appropriation, he would not make an extravagant appropriation. He was a friend to the State House measure now, though doing all he could hist session to defeat the commencement of it. This will be all the money the commissioners should ask for. By the 1st of May there will be derived from revenue $80,000, and by the 1st of November $80,000, which, added to the $100,000 he proposed, will make $610,000 for the two years, and that is al1 they can conveniently dispose of. The Legislature should not levy more than a two cent tax.
Mr. LANGDON could not understand why senators insist on appropriating but $100,000, when it is universally admitted that there is $200,000 lying idle in the treasury. Now, while labor and material is cheap,it is proper, and we have resolved that this construction should go on. If there is delay, prices will go up. The idle money is bringing no interest to the State. Then why not use it where it is so much needed? He insisted the best plan is set forth in the amendments reported by the committee.
Mr. STREIGHT said the first story should be put up this year, the joists put on and covered over, so as to keep it protected from the weather, and the lumber should be bought, whether anything else is done or not. It will cost $330,000 to carry the work up to the joists on the first story. The report contemplates $100,000 from the tax levy and $200,O0O from the general fund, and still there would be a shortage of $30,000.
Mr. BURRELL demanded the previous question, which was seconded and put under its operation, and on a division of the question. the first proposition on the appropriation was rejected by yeas 12, nays 34; the second proposition for a levy of 2 per cent. was also rejected by yeas 11, nays 36.
Mr. URMSTON moved to amend by striking out all that part making the expenditure of $200,000 in 1879 imperative. He said the State House Commission have a duty to perform, and the time as to when this fund shall be expended should be left to them.
Mr. MENVIES thought this is the time to purchase iron. which is about to rise, and to Handicap the contractors would be an unworthy net on the part of the State. This report meets the approval of the State House commissioners.
Mr. BURRELL said there seemed to be an effort here to aid the contractors more than they had a right to expect. In two years hence, if this is done, they will ask the Legislature to give them still farther advantage.
Mr. FOWLER hoped the appropriation of $200,000 to be expended this year, will not prevail.
The amendment [Mr. Urmston's] was rejected by yeas 12, nays 33.
Mr. FOWLER moved to amend sec. 2 by reducing the amount appropriated for 1879, from $200,000 to $100,000.
Mr. WOOD opposed delay in building the State House. It should be completed at the earliest time that will give the State a substantial structure. He was willing to vote money enough to carry out this object, believing that delay will remit in a loss to the State and a large expendtiure of money that is not now contemplated. It is estimated that four years is required to complete the State House. If it takes a longer time it will be because we do not appropriate money enough to speedily construct the building. Labor and materials are cheap, cheaper than they will be in the future. The Springfield State House is an example of delay. The extra cost to the people of Illinois through delay in appropriations of sufficient money to carry on the work exceeded all claims as to its cost. The State will save money and get a better building by completing it in the next four years.
The amendment was rejected.
The report of the committee as amended was concurred in by yeas 32, nays 13.
The LIEUTENANT GOVERNOR laid before the Senate a communication from the governor transmitting the following appointments: For president of the boards of trustees of the Institutions the Insane, Deaf and Dumb and Blind--John Fishback, to serve till February 1,1883. For trustees of the Insane Hospital--B. F. Spann, till February 1, 1883, and R. H Tarlton,till February 1,1881. For trustees of the Institution for the Deaf and Dumb--F. O. Johnson, till 1 February 1, 1883, and Milton James, till February 1, 1883. For trustees of the Blind Asylum--Joseph Ristine, till February 1, 1883, and William V. Wiles till February 1, 1881.
Mr. STREIGHT moved to refer these nominations to the
On motion by Mr. MENZIES this motion to refer was laid. on the table by yeas 24, nays 23; and under the operation of the previous question demanded by Mr. FOWLER, the nominations were confirmed by yeas 30, nays 15.
On motion by Mr. BURRELL--yeas 25, nays 24--the congressional apportionment bill [H. R. 486] was taken up and read the second time, with the majority and minority reports thereon--the former proposing amendments, and the latter deeming it impolitic to reapportion the State this year, in view of the new census to be taken next year, under which Indiana will be entitled to additional representation in Congress, which will require a new apportionment in 1881 by the next General Assembly. The minority report closes by recommending the in definite postponement of the bill, or if a new apportionment is to be made this session, that a special committee of five be appointed--two each from the Democratic and Republican, and one from the National party--to adopt a new bill. The report is signed by Messrs. Harris, Comstock, Olds, Smith, Taylor and Mercer.
On the further motion of Mr. BURRELL the bill and reports were made the special order for to morrow at 10 o'clock.
On motion by Mr. LANGDON the State House bill [H. R. 637] was read the third time, and passed the Senate by yeas --, nays --, Messrs. COMSTOCK, DICE, HART, TRAYLOR and WOOD explaining their negative votes to be on account of the levy being placed in the bill at "three" per cent., instead of "two."
On motion by Mr. WOOLLEN the House concurrent resolution providing 15 days' pay for members of the benevolent institutions after the adjournment was taken up and amended by inserting provisions for the pay of a short hand reporter, etc.
And then the Senate adjourned.
The session was opened with prayer by Rev. Mr. Abbott.
The reading of the Journal was omitted.
Mr. HEROD offered a concurrent resolution that the pay of the reading clerk of the Senate and House be fixed at $6 per day, which was adopted--yeas 77, nays 8.
Mr. OVERMEYER offered a concurrent resolution, which was adopted--yeas 78, nays 8-- authorizing the auditor of state to draw his warrant for the per diem of members of the benevolent institution investigating committee for a term not to exceed 16 days after the adjournment of the General Assembly.
The
The
Mr. WORKS offered the following resolution, which was adopted:
Whereas, the
The
The
Mr. WILLARD, from the
A message from the Senate was read refusing to concur in the amendments of the House to the bill [S. 65] defining and to prevent the publication thereof, was read--when
Mr. OSBORNE of Elkhart moved that the House now recede from its amendments to the bill, which was agreed to.
Mr. BAKER, from the
Mr. TAYLOR of Daviess, from the
The above reports were concurred in, and the bills severally ordered engrossed.
Mr. STRUCKER, from the
Mr. GORDON hoped the report of the committee would not be concurred in, as he thought the bill ought to pass.
Mr. SLEETH thought this bill unequal and unjust, as it discriminates in favor of Marion county. He demanded that legislation shall be general, and when toll was reduced in Marion county it should extend to all parts of the State.
Mr. HUBBARD thought it looked like there was a personal spite in this matter somewhere.
Mr. HANDY said this bill takes the control of the road out of the hands of the company and places it under the control of the county commissioners. He thought it was one of the most outrageous propositions ever submitted to this House. If you want to go back to the mud road of 40 years ago you can do so by the passage of this bill. Be thought the report of the committee ought to be concurred in.
Mr. WORKS said he thought that every turnpike should stand upon an equal footing, and there was no reason why we should pass this bill.
Mr. NAVE was informed by a member of this company that this road cost $3,000 per mile and the net earnings were but 4 per cent. He hoped the report of the committee would be concurred in.
Mr. KIRKPATRICK said if we adopt this kind of legislation we will discourage the building of other gravel roads. He was of the opinion that this was a personal pique, and that the report should be concurred in.
Under the operation of the previous question
Mr. KESTER called up his bill [H. R. 265] for a revision of the road law which was read the third time, [it abolishes the office of supervisor, and provides that the trustee shall assess a road-tax for not less than 5 nor more than 25 cents on the $100, and a poll-tax of 50 cents. and that the work shall be done under the supervision of the township trustee,] and failed to pass by yeas 30, nays 47.
The House took a recess until 2 o'clock.
Mr. OSBORNE of Elkhart, called up his bill [H. R. 254] to protect the purity of the ballot-box, which was read the third time. He said it was to protect the growing evil of influencing elections with money, and to define a method for the printed ballot. The object of the present law is to allow a secret ballot, and by a law prescribing the method, this can be better secured.
Mr. SLEETH said no gentleman would go further than he to guard the purity of the ballot box. If the tickets shall exceed the width prescribed, the man that votes it will be liable to a prosecution therefor under the provision of this bill. It was one of the most iniquitous measures he ever saw. The bill prescribes that the paper upon which the ballot is printed shall be sized and he did not know what sized paper was, and therefore did not know whether his vote would be legal or not.
Mr. WILLARD: If ever there was a bill calculated to open fraud in elections, it was the bill before us to-day. You could never arrive at the certainty of a fair election with such a law as this. He did not want to open the door any farther for fraud at the elections. He hoped it would not pass.
Mr. MITCHELL thought the tickets could be printed within an appropriate width, and was in favor of the passage of the bill.
Mr. WORKS said that even if the objection was a technical one it was a good one. Every law should be plain and enforced. If the ticket is not to be prescribed in the bill it ought not to be encumbered therewith. There were portions of the bill he would like to vote for, and others that he could not endorse.
Mr. OSBORNE said this bill was too stringent for the trickster politician, and he sup posed it would be. It was to prevent the voter being deceived with the posters or other tricks used to defraud the voter. It strikes off the shackles that have so long hung around the ballot and makes it free. It would stop the indiscriminate use of money to influence voters.
The bill failed to pass--yeas 45, nays 54.
Pending the roll call--
Mr. FAULKNER, when his name was called, in explanation of his vote, said inasmuch as there was a sovereign balm already gone ahead in the constitutional amendments, he voted "no."
The
The rules being suspended for the purpose,
On the motion of Mr. MIERS the amendments were considered engrossed and the bill read the third time.
Mr. VANPELT said in his judgment there was a cat in the meal tub. He did not like the style it got in here. He believed the Legislature fully competent to sit upon the claims against the State. He thought the bill ought to be rejected at once.
Mr. DRAKE thought it was taking the power from the body that ought to pass upon all claims against the State. This bill would open the door for fraud and corruption.
Mr. TAYLOR, of Daviess, was opposed to the bill. Ever since a commission was constituted to sit upon and determine, a president that was not elected he was opposed to a commission. Unless we give proper attention to claims here the necessity would come for a court of claims. For this reason he objected.
Mr. GORDON thought there was more behind it than the friends hold up. A gentleman had approached him and asked that if he did not say anything in its favor for his sake not to oppose it.
Mr. BRIGGS had failed in the examination of the bill to see any tiling to justify what had been said against this bill. It makes the State officers the commissioners of claims, and does not cost the State anything. This bill ought to pass. All claims must be certified to before the Legislature will allow it. Nothing could be fairer.
Mr. JOHNSON had a slight objection to this bill. It would allow judgments to be piled up mountain high, which would never be set aside until there would be an appropriation made for that purpose.
Mr. OSBORNE, of Elkhart, said if there was anything covered up in this bill that was wrong he would not support it, but he regarded it as one of the important measures before the test of worth more to the State than any measure. He regarded it as a bill that would prevent fraudulent claims being allowed.
Mr. CONNER believed there would be large expense attending the operation of such a measure, and he should vote against the bill.
Mr. FANCHER thought that claims against the State ought to be brought before the representatives of the State. It would be much easier to lobby a claim through a commission of two men than a commission of 100. He believed the bill unjust and ought not to be passed.
Under the operations of the previous question the bill failed to pass--yeas 28, nays 67.
Mr. MITCHELL called up his bill [H. R. 629] repealing the act of March 3, 1877, in relation to township elections, which was read the third time and failed to pass--yeas 36, nays 58.
Mr. NAVE called up the bill [S. 140] to authorize the surrender of city charters, which was read the third time.
Mr. TAYLOR of Daviess said there was no law by which a city charter can be dissolved, and this law makes this provision. If a city desires to dissolve its charter he thought there should be some law to authorize it to do so.
Mr. BLOCKLEY had never been solicited in this matter, and had never even received letters on the subject, and if the citizens of Mount Vernon wanted this bill parsed he would have been informed of it without doubt.
The bill passed by--yeas 76, nays 15.
Mr. OSBORNE, of Vermillion, called up the bill [H. R. 439] to legalize certain sales and conveyances, made by various county auditors of the State to secure the payment of loans made from the common school fund.
Mr. SHANKS was opposed to legalizing as long as the courts are the place for this business. This kind of legislation is dangerous, and we ought not to engage in it.
Mr. TULLEY could see no objection to this bill, and he hoped it would pass.
Mr. MARCH doubted the propriety of passing such a bill.
The bill failed to pass--yeas 25, nays 62.
Mr. OVERMEYER called up his bill [H. R. 75] to limit appeals to the supreme
court,when the amount in controversy, exclusive of costs, exceeds $200, and must be
taken within six
Mr. TULLEY thought the bill would work hardships in cities and towns. The principle involved in a controversy is just as sacred if the amount is less than $200 as if it were $1,000. His judgment was this bill ought not to pass.
Mr. FANCHER said the fact that the supreme court is behind is no argument in favor of this bill. No man should be prohibited from coming into the supreme court. He thought the bill should not pass.
Mr. FAULKNER said this bill was wrong and ought not to pass
Mr. WORKS was opposed to this bill. It was just as important for the settlement of a principle where the amount in controversy was small as where it was large.
Mr. VANPELT said there was another side to this question. If you had a horse killed by the railroad, you have to go to the supreme court for redress, and it would work hard to the poor man who had not the money to take his case into the supreme court.
Mr. THAYER: The fact is, that corporations or rich man who can carry their cases to the supreme court have the advantage over the poor man who can not pay lawyers' fees. He thought the interests of the people were just as safe in the lower courts as in the supreme court.
Mr. SLEETH was opposed to the bill because the poor man is compelled to pay his tax, and this bill would close the door of justice against him. He should have as equal chance, though his claim does not amount to $200.
Under the operation of the previous question the bill failed to pass by--yeas 32, nays 50.
Mr. OWEN called up his bill [H. R. 630] regulating the presentation of claims against counties before the board of county commissioners and the adjudication of the same, which was read the third time.
Mr. FAULKNER was opposed to this bill because it made two lawsuits instead of one.
The bill passed by yeas 63, nays 17.
Mr. PERRY called up his bill [H. R. 262] requiring county commissioners to let the county printing,including the advertising of the delinquent tax list, to the lowest responsible bidder, which was read the third. time and passed by yeas 62, nays 25.
The House then adjourned.
The minutes of yesterday's proceedings were not read.
Mr. BENZ offered the following:
WHEREAS, There is ample time for the full consideration and
final passage or the general appropriation bill, thus avoiding a special session;
therefore
Be it resolved, That the consideration of said general appropriation bill be commenced at once and acted upon finally now.
It was adopted by yeas 34, nays 13.
Pending the roll call--
Mr. REEVE protested against this action, because it declares there is time enough to consider the appropriation bill. He believed there is not time to properly consider it, and that the attempt is a political measure of certain interested parties to force on the statute an unjust and ill considered law and who until now have forced off its consideration. Therefore he voted "no."
Mr. WOOLLEN, when his name was called, protested that we have not time to act upon the appropriation bills and also pass a fee and salary bill at the regular session, and believing that this resolution is moved for the purpose of preventing legislation upon the subject of fees and salaries, he voted "no."
Mr. FOSTER, also obtained leave to file his protest, knowing that we have not sufficient time to act on the appropriation bill, and believing this to be an attempt to prevent legislation on fees and salaries. He voted "no."
These protests, on motion of the senators making them, were severally ordered spread upon the journal.
The result of the vote was then announced as above, and accrdingly--
The bill [H. R. 492] an act making appropriations for the expenses of the State Government and its institutions, directing the object to which such appropriations shall be applied, requiring public accounts to be kept by the fiscal years of the State, and repealing inconsistent laws, was read the second time, with a report from the finance committee recommending its passage, with amendments.
Mr. HARRIS moved to concur in the report, of the committee, in lieu of which, on motion of Mr. WINTERBOTHAM, it was agreed that each amendment proposed by the commitee should be separately considered.
Mr. WILSON made an ineffectual motion--yeas 21, nays 25--to strike out the amendment allowing the governor a clerk at a salary of $800.
The LIEUTENANT GOVERNOR announced (at 11 o'clock--on the demand of Mr. Burrell) the special order [H. R. 486] the Congressional apportionment bill.
Mr. HARRIS moved to set aside the special order.
Mr. BURRELL made an ineffectual motion--yeas 22, nays 27--to lay this motion on the table.
The motion to set aside the special order was agreed to by yeas 27. nays 22.
The LIEUTENANT GOVERNOR decided the committee amendments to the bill shall be first considered, and then the bill will be open for further amendment.
The committee amendment increasing the salary of the secretary of state's deputy from $1,000 to $1,500 being read--
Mr. MENZIES favored the amendment because the people complain only of the burden imposed by local taxation; they do not complain of the State tax.
Mr. DICE opposed raising the salaries of State officers in the general appropriation bill, as contrary to what is just and right; if they must be increased let it be done in an act especially embracing that subject, and that alone. Any increase of salaries in this bill is contrary to the fee and salary law of 1875, and should not be permitted.
Mr. BENZ said that Republican Senators were all the time talking about fees and
salaries. If they want a fee and salary bill, in the name of God why didn't they
introduce one long ago? We were here sixty days, and they never said a word about it,
and now that we are very near adjourning, they don't talk about anything else. He was
getting tired of it. They have always kept quiet about fees and salaries while they were
in power, but
Mr. FOSTER favored a reduction of salaries all along the line, and was astonished to see his party friends favoring an increase.
Mr. HEFRON moved to amend by splitting the difference--making the salary $1,200.
On motion by Mr. FOWLER, it was rejected.
Om motion by Mr. STREIGHT, a recess of 10 minutes was taken to allow members an opportunity of an introduction to General Robert H. Milroy.
The committee amendment, increasing the salary from $1,000 to $1,500, was rejected by-- yeas 21, nays 26.
Then came the recess until 2 o'clock.
The LIEUTENANT GOVERNOR laid before the Senate a communication from the governor nominating Mrs. Emily A. Roache as manager of the Female Prison and Reformatory. Also Finley Bigger, of Rash county, and L. A. Barnett, of Hendrick's county, as commissioners of the House of Refuge. Also John P. Earley, of Laport county, and. Robert D. Brown, of Dearborn county, each to same, four years; and B. F. Ibach, of Huntington county, as trustees for the Asylum for Feeble-Minded Children, to serve the two years.
On motion by Mr. FOWLER, these nominations were severally confirmed by the Senate.
The Senate then returned to the consideration of the general appropriation bill [H. R. 592].
Mr. WINTERBOTHAM then moved that the amendments proposed by the committee on finance be adopted as a whole, and demanded the previous question, which was seconded by yeas--27, nays 21. Under its operation the report was adopted by--yeas 27, nays 22.
Pending the roll call, in seconding the demand for the previous question.
Mr. REEVE submitted the following: As a representative of 60,000 people, whose social, political and financial condition are to be affected materially affected, and, in any event, a pecuniary burden is being placed on them, which ought to. be made as light as possible, and they are entitled to be heard, and by this order of the previous question all consideration is cut off, and the vote is forced on senators who have no practical knowledge of the provisions of this bill. He protested against the action of the majority in forcing action without consideration, under the previous question, as tyranical, unjust, in violation of the rights of the people and their representatives, as an abuse of parliamentary power, dangerous alike to individual and national liberty in its final consequences, and not as an approval or rejection of the bill as a whole or a part, but that he may not vote for what ought not to pass He voted "no "
Mr. FOSTER looked upon this as a most infamous scheme to override the voice of senators and prevent a full consideration of how the people's money shall be voted away. The first and only section of the bill or report considered shows that in the very outset salaries were to be increased. And the committee, finding that the Senate would not sustain it in its "fee and salary raising," it now undertakes by a "gag" to close the mouths of senators, and put the report through under the previous question, which prevents any senator on the floor knowing how much of the people's money they are voting away, excepting the seven senators constituting the finance committee. He voted "no."
The above protests were ordered spread upon the journal on motion of their authors.
Pending the roll call on adopting the amendments reported by the committee on finance as a whole (the Senate acting under the operations of the previous question)--
Mr. BRISCOE, in explanation of his vote, said it was a burning shame that the "gag" law (the previous question) should be demanded on so important a question as this on one of the most important matters that has come before the Legislature our mouths are shut, they are closed. He knew not how to vote, nor did but few senators on the floor know but little about this bill, yet the gag law is placed upon their mouths. He voted "no."
Mr. FOSTER, when his name was called, said it looked like the gag law was brought in here to stop the mouths of senators because the leaders here was not satisfied with the intention of the Senate to consider this bill by sections so it may understand what it is doing. It was infamous, a burning shame and a disgrace to the Democratic party to permit such a thing to be done. He voted "no."
Mr. BOWLER in explanation of his vote said he suggested that course to the chairman of the finance committee [Mr. Winterbotham] he had confidence in the intelligence of the committee, and would vote "aye."
Mr. GARRIGUS when his name was called, said it is proper that senators should have opportunity to carefully investigate the provisions of this bill. Judging by the items read, this bill proposes an increase of salaries probably 50 per cent., and he would like to understand what is in the balance of the bill, therefore he would rein senators in the other [Democratic] side of the chamber and vote "no."
Mr. GRUBBS in explanation of his vote said: Beleiving every senator should act advisably on every question, and as that can not be done by voting for these amendments as a whole, he was compelled to vote "no,"
Mr. HARRIS, when his name was called said: Two years ago three days were spent on a similar bill, and the oppositions were increased rather than diminished, and as the session is fast drawing to a close he was justified in voting "aye."
Mr. HART, when his name was called, in explanation of his vote, said: This is altogether too important a measure to be put through under the gag law under any consideration whatever. He did not think, outside of the committee on finance, there is a senator on this floor who understood what he is voting or or against; and to put this bill through because we are on the eve of the close of the session is not a justifiable excuse for doing so without any consideration at all, and therefore he voted "no."
Mr. KEMP, in explanation of his vote, said he was satisfied the finance committee can perfect this appropriation bill better than the whole senate, therefore he had no hesitancy in voting "aye."
Mr. OLDS, when his name was called, said if these amendments were considered separately it will be impossible to pass this bill this session, and believing it better to vote for the bill as reported by the committee, and thus pass it, believing a general discussion would end in no good, but make a large expense to the State of Indiana, he would vote "aye."
Mr. REEVE, when his name was called, said: Were he placed in a position where he could close the mouths of those acting for others, so as to prevent their considering the issues financial, social or political, affecting those for whom they act, and he should do so, he should consider himself a miserable, contemptible coward, deserving to be kicked out of an organization where the rights of others are decided. He voted "no."
Mr. RILEY,when his name was called said: Having entire confidence in the ability of the finance committe, he should vote "aye."
Mr. SHAFFER, in explanation of his vote, said he could not support this measure from. the fact he did not know what the amendment in the report contained. He invariably desired to understand what he was voting for, and as he did not know what would be involved in an affirmative vote on this question he was compelled to vote "no."
Mr. SHIRK, when his name was called, in explanation of his vote said: Believing the great importance of this bill demanded a full and fair consideration; and believing that in many cases the appropriations made in it are entirely too large for the purposes for which they are intended, and that a reduction should be made in many of the appropriations, he voted "aye."
Mr. TRAYLOR, in explanation of his vote, when his name was called, said: The people complain, with good cause, that the Legislature invariably postpones the consideration of the bill appropriating the people's money till the last hours of the session, and then it is passed through without one consideration, after thousands of dollars being voted away on the say so of seven men. He had confidence in the Senate committee, but 100 men in the other House have carefully considered the appropriations made in this bill, and as seven men of the committee have seen fit to change the amounts, it would be wrong to say these seven men are right and the 100 are wrong. He therefore voted, "no," hoping the Senate would consider the various appropriations proposed, item by item.
Mr. WOOD said: This bill is very important to the people, because hundreds of thousands of dollars are taken from their pockets through its provisions. It is bad policy and bad leadership to force this important bill through this Senate under the gag of the previous question without any scrutiny or debate. We are only agents of the people, and if his agent should adjust all bills for two years without examining them at all, he should discharge that agent as an unsafe business man. The people, therefore, should discharge us for doing the same thing. He has confidence in the finance committee, but wanted to know the result of their deliberations. He would feel that he had done a dishonest thing, and would go back to his constituents disgraced if he voted in the dark to disburse over $1,000,000, without any examination whatever, or without ever hearing the bill read. As many Republicans as Democrats voted for this bill in the dark, and the blame must be borne equally between them. He voted "No."
Mr. WOOLLEN, when his name was called, in explanation of his vote, said he had the honor of assisting in making up this report, and, with a few exceptions, fully concurred in the action of the committee; but, believing that every bill which appropriates money out of the State treasury should receive a fair and open discussion, and that no money should be appropriated from the State treasury until the measure is fully, openly and fairly discussed, he voted "no."
Mr. WILSON, in explanation of his vote, when his name was called, said he was anxious to vote for this bill to carry on the Government of the State, but desired to do so with that propriety and judgment which would enable him to act with justice to himself and the people who sent him here. He had high respect for and great confidence in the senators composing the committee, which considered and proposed amendments to this bill, but having to be guided by his own judgment in voting, he can not vote for these amendments without knowing what is in them. Then, again, senators on this floor, having legislative experience, say that large sums of money have been voted away at the close of the session, without due consideration. In some cases they have been astonished when charged with voting for some appropriation, and would not believe it till they went to the journal and found their votes recorded in favor of it. It is the last straw that breaks the earners back; therefore, with this experience of legislators who have gone before him, in order to keep from voting in total ignorance of the provisions embodied in this report, he was neccessarily compelled to vote "no "
Mr. WINTERBOTHAM, in explanation of his vote when his name was called, said: This bill came into the committee's hands but a short time ago, and every moment the committee could spare has been given to the careful consideration of this bill, for the purpose of presenting it in a shape that would receive the almost unanimous approval of the Senate. The committee did not wish to force the bill on the Senate, but day before yesterday it was made a special order, when he endeavored to bring it before the Senate; but, instead, legalizing acts were called up, and the consequence was, action on this bill had been deferred until the present time. He had endeavored to bring this bill before the Senate every day since it was reported from the committee, but had been unsuccessful till now. Unless this bill is acted upon at this time, and speedily, an extra session becomes necessary, and the question turns on this: shall we adopt this bill or have an extra session? He made this movement on purpose, on purpose to prevent the necessity for an extra session. He voted "no."
The result of the vote was then announced as above recorded, so the amendments proposed to the general appropriation bill by the finance committee were adopted as a whole.
On motion by Mr. WINTERBOTHAM, the bill as a whole was adopted, without a division, after an ineffectual motion to amend it, by Mr. HEFRON, that the bill be read and considered by sections.
Mr. HARRIS moved that the constitutional rule, intended to restrain hasty legislation, be dispensed with, that the bill may be read the third time now and put on its passage.
The motion was rejected--yeas 30, nays 17--for want of the two-thirds majority required by the constitution, after an ineffectual motion by Mr. REEVE--yeas 18, nays 30--to lay the motion [Mr. Harris'] on the table.
Mr. WINTERBOTHAM moved that the order of business be dispensed with, that the
Mr. MENZIES moved to amend by taking up the bill [H. R. 344] to regulate fees and salaries.
This motion was agreed to by yeas 27, nays 11, and the fee and salary bill [H. R. 314] was taken up. The amendments reported by the Senate committee were read [being largely embraced in the bill S. 424--Mr. Briscoe's.]
Mr. BRISCOE moved that the report be considered by sections.
Mr. WOOLLEN hoped the report will not be concurred in. It is expected by the people that we will begin at the beginning and scale down where the salaries are now too high. This is a subject that will require a great deal of time, and could best be considered before a special committee of five. He made that motion, connected with instructions to the committee to report Monday at 10 o'clock.
Mr. FOSTER opposed the motion.
Mr. KENT favored the reference to a committee. It would be much wiser to engage in legislation that will bring about some result.
Mr. REEVE also favored reference. [On his motion a short recess was taken, for the
pur-[pose]
The LIEUTENANT GOVERNOR makes that committee to consist of Messrs. Woollen, Shirk, Kent, Reeve and Briscoe.
On motion by Mr. DICE, the House amendments to the Senate amendments to the State House bill [H. R. 637], reducing the levy from "3" to "2" per cent, and making the appropriation for 1880 $100,000, was read and laid on the table, by consent, on motion by Mr. STREIGHT.
On motion by Mr. LANGDON--yeas 36, nays 11--the general appropriation bill [H. R. 592] was taken up.
His further motion that the constitutional rule be dispensed with in order that the bill may be considered on the third reading was rejected (for the second time) by--yeas 30, nays 14.
On motion by Mr. KRAMER--yeas 41, nays 4--the vote by which the bill was adopted as a whole was reconsidered.
On motion by Mr. BURRELL--yeas 24, nays 23--the congressional apportionment bill [H. R. 480] was taken up.
Mr. HEFRON moved its reference to a special committee of five.
Mr. HARRIS moved that the committee consist of two Democrats, two Republicans and one National.
On motion by Mr. MENZIES this motion was rejected by--yeas 25, nays 22.
Mr. SARNIGHAUSEN announced his pair on all questions except the passage of bills with the senator from Lagrange [Mr. Wier] till Monday, 2 o'clock p. m.
The motion to refer the congressional apportionment bill to a select committee of five was agreed, to.
The LIEUTENANT GOVERNOR subsequently made this committee to consist of Messrs. Hefron, Garrigus, Winterbotham, Davis and Urmston.
Mr. FOSTER moved to take up the bill [H. R. 58] to abolish attorney's fees.
Mr. WINTERBOTHAM moved to amend by taking up the congressional apportionment bill [S. 35].
On motion by My. LANGDON--yeas 23, nays 22--this motion was laid on the table.
Mr. WOOD made an ineffectual motion yeas 22, nays 23--to adjourn.
Mr. LANGDON, by leave, introduced a bill [S. 443] concerning the order of business of the Senate and House of Representatives of the State of Indiana, which was read the first time. It prohibits the final action on all legalizing or curative bills until after the general apportionment bill is passed. He moved that the constitutional restriction be dispensed with in order that the bill may be read thy second time by title, the third time by section and put on its passage now; and spoke at length in favor of his motion. When he had concluded--
Mr. FOSTER moved as a substitute for the pending motion to take up the bill [H. R. 58] to abolish attorney's fees.
Mr. BENZ moved to lay this motion on the table, pending which--
The Senate adjourned.
The reading of the minutes of yesterday's proceedings was dispensed with, except that part with reference to the passage of the bill [H. R. 262] requiring county commissioners to let,the county printing to the lowest bidder.
Mr. LEHMAN, from the
The bill [S. 442] supplemental to the act regulating several elections, was read the third time, and passed the House by--yeas 82, nays 2.
Mr. SAINT offered a resolution, which was adopted, authorizing the committee on the investigation of the Benevolent Institutions to report to his excellency, Governor 'Williams, provided there shall be no extra session of the Legislature.
Mr. REED called up the bill [S. 43] to exempt the wages of laborers from garnishment, etc., which was read the third time, and passed the House by yeas 81, nays 7.
Mr. REICHELDARFER called up the bill [S. 23] to legalize the acts of the Common Council of the town of Huntington, which was read the third time.
Mr. DROVER said that if the people of Huntington wanted this kind of legalization he would not be a member on this floor, as it was upon that issue he was elected.
Mr. HESS had a large number of taxpayers of the city upon a petition asking that this Legislature shall legalize the acts of this town, and saw no reason why this bill should not pass.
The bill then failed to pass, for want of a constitutional majority--yeas 47, nays 39.
Mr. ROBESON called up the bill [S. 39] authorizing railroad companies to extend their lines and change the termini thereof, which was read the third time.
Mr. GORDON thought this bill would trample upon the rights of the people. He was sure our railroad law was liberal enough, and he was opposed to extending the power of corporations.
Mr. HEROD was for the material and substantial good of the people, and if a railroad wants to go five miles further, let it go. This bill allows the company to extenh their roads in a direct line.
Mr. HUMPHREYS said he thought this was a good bill, and he hoped it would pass.
Mr. BRIGGS said this bill ought to pass as he thought it was in the interest of the people.
Mr. SCHWEITRER thought the bill should pass. The people of his county wanted such a bill, in order that they might build another line of road, thereby securing to them cheaper freight on coal, etc.
Mr. GORDON did not want to make a captious objection to this bill. The people were not asking for this bill, it was the railroads; and the railroads of this State were mostly in the hands of foreign corporations.
Mr. HOPKINS thought it could do no harm, and ought to pass.
The bill then passed the House by yeas 83, nays 9.
Mr. LEHMAN moved to reconsider the action of the House this morning, whereby the papers in the contested election case of Drake vs. Bearss was withdrawn.
On the motion of Mr. TAYLOR, of Daviess, the motion was laid on the table.
The amendments of the Senate to the bill [H. R. 637] for the construction of the new State House, being read--
Mr. OVERMEYER moved to concur in the amendments, with an amendment adding an emergency clause. He said that the Senate had stricken out all of the House bill after the enacting clause and inserted new matter that a levy shall be made for the years 1879 and 1880 of three cents on the $100, and that there shall be appropriated from the treasury for the year 1879, $200,000, to be used for the erection of the new State House.
Mr. SHANKS was opposed to taxing the people more now than was necessary. He was
Mr. STUCKER was opposed to this bill as it passed the House, and he so voted. Now it has come back from. the Senate with amendments fixing a levy of three per cent. The hard times and heavy taxes now imposed on the people was enough. He thought it time to call a halt, and would enter his protest against any and all acts of this House that will add one additional cent to the taxes already imposed on the people. He held it to be our duty to decrease instead of increasing the taxes. This additional tax is not demanded nor asked for by the people. He wanted it understood that he was opposed to this bill, amendments. and everything connected with it, and should oppose it to the end, and he hoped the Senate amendment would not be concurred in.
A division of the question was demanded and the emergency clause was agreed to.
Mr. HUMPHREYS said this was a cheaper bill than the House bill and he hoped the amendments of the Senate would be concurred in.
Mr. HOPKINS said he thought we ought to adopt the 3 per cent. levy, and pay as you go.
Mr. WILLARD was willing the bill should pass if amended so as to make a 2 per cent. levy instead of 3, otherwise he hoped the Senate amendments would not be concurred. in. He was opposed to taxing the people any more just now than was actually necessary.
A demand for a call of the House was made by Mr. WIMMER,and was being taken when Mr. MARCH, explaining, said he did not think there was, any necessity of a 3 per cent. tax, or for borrowing money either.
Mr. MIERS believed $480,000 was too much to be expended in two years.
The amendments as they now stood were rejected by--yeas 39, nays 64.
Mr. WILLARD moved to concur when so amended as to reduce the levy to two cents on the $100.
Mr. OVERMEYER asked a division of the question. The proposition to strike out "three" cents and insert "two" cents was agreed to, by consent.
The question then recurred upon concurence in the Senate amendments.
Mr. 0VERMEYER hoped that the House would not concur in the Senate amendments, in order that he might further amend so that moneys that will hereafter come into the State treasury may be used in the construction of the new State House.
Mr. WLLLARD was willing to give $200,000 the first year, but for tear of creating a deficiency he was unwilling to appropriate that sum for the next year. He desired the building to be put up in such a manner as it will stand for ages without settling.
Mr. VANPELT was in favor of the 2 per cent. levy, and was also in favor of the proposition offered, or proposed to be offered, by Mr. Overmeyer.
Mr. MIERS did not think that the people would be willing to appropriate more than $450,000 for two years, and he was opposed to appropriating any more, or to open up any contingent fund.
Mr. WILLARD'S motion to concur in the Senate amendments was temporarily laid on the table so that--
Mr. OVERMEYER might submit an amendment that there should be appropriated from the general fund in the State treasury the sum of $100,000 to be used for the building of the new state house, during the year 1880, to be paid out of any funds not otherwise appropriated, which was adopted by yeas 64, nays 30.
The Senate amendments as amended by the House were then adopted by yeas 61, nays 32.
The House then took a recess till 2 o'clock.
Mr. DAVIS called up the bill [S. 365] for the relief of the Lye Creek Drainage association, which was read the third time and psssed by yeas 70, nays 16.
The
Mr. RODMAN called up the bill [S. 158] concerning married women, which was read the third time.
Mr. MARCH said this was a well guarded bill, and should be passed without hesitation.
Mr. TULLEY said this bill was a radical innovation of the law as it bas stood for 1,000 years. He thought this was making an advance dangerous to the interests of married women. He was in favor of giving them an exemption equal with men--of $1,000. The bill ought not to pass.
Mr. HEROD thought this was one of the best women's rights measures yet presented. It prevents the wife from putting a mortgage upon her property for the debts of her husband, which was right, and he hoped the bill would pass.
The bill then passed the House by--yeas 83, nays 12.
Mr. ROBINSON called up the bill [S. 270] to reduce the number of superior courts in Marion county, which was read the third time, and passed the House by--yeas 83, nays 2.
Mr. TULLEY called up the bill [S. 23] to legalize the acts of the town of Huntington, that failed to pass this morning for want of a constitutional majority, which was again put upon its passage, and finally passed the House--by yeas 56, nays 29.
Mr. ROOKER called up the bill [S. 136] to regulate the use of human bodies for the purposes of dissection, etc, which was read the third time.
Mr. DRAKE was in favor of this bill. It is necessary to enact a law, by which medical students and colleges can get subjects for anatomical purposes; and, unless such a law was provided, no one could be assured that the graves of loved ones are protected, from body-snatchers. This bill is carefully guarded.
The bill then passed the House by--yeas 87, nays 7.
Mr. SAINT, explaining his negative vote, said: He voted against this bill for the reason that it affects principally medical colleges, and he did not believe they will observe the law, and the bill will offer many temptations to perjury and other unlawful acts. He further believed if it was observed it would transfer grave-snatching from the cities, where many unknown bodies can be obtained, to the rural districts, where a grave can not be touched without outraging me most sacred feelings of some family in the neighborhood. He therefore voted "no."
On the motion of Mr. OSBORNE of Elkhart, the order of business was suspended and the bill [89] to promote the science of medicine and surgery, and providing human subjects for anatomical and scientific dissection, was read the third time.
Mr. GORDON could not vote for this bill. He would rather be guilty of the felony than
take the subjects from the Institution'of the Hospital for the Insane, and thought it
possi-[ble]
Mr. OSBORNE, of Elkhart, was satisfied that the provisions of the bill were well guarded, and that the bill ought to pass.
The bill then passed the House by--yeas 54, nays 34.
Pending the roll call--
Mr. EDWINS, in explanation of his vote, said he was in favor of a good dissecting law, or for anything that would elevate the medical profession, but could not vote for a bill that makes such discrimination between rich and poor. He voted "no."
Mr. FAULKNER explaining, said he voted "no" because it takes all poor and unfortunate men, and is an inducement for our benevolent institutions to sell all the bodies of the poor and unfortunate inmates.
Mr. SAINT, in explanation of his vote, said he never would vote for a law that even appears to discriminate in favor of one class of people against another. He voted "no."
Mr. TAYLOR, of Daviess, in explanation of his vote, when his name was called, said this medical fraternity would have our bodies anyhow, and we might as well be taken right from the death-bed to the dissecting table, as to be taken there from any other place. He voted "aye."
The vote was then announced as above.
Mr. SAINT called up Mr. Edwin's bill [H. R. 420] for the relief of Alexander Ingles, which was read the third time and passed by--yeas 71, nays 9.
[The House then took a short recess in honor of the presence of Hon. Daniel W. Voorhees and Hon. Joseph E. McDonald, United States senators for Indiana.]
Mr. SCHOLL called up the bill [S. 17] to enable the owners of wet lands to drain and reclaim the same, which was read the third time and passed by--yeas 73, nays 5.
Mr. SCHWEITZER called up the bill [S. 187--see these Senate reports February 21, p. m.] providing for the election and appointment of supervisors, which was read the third time and passed by--yeas 65, nays 14.
The House then took up the bill [H. R. 347] to amend the charter of the city of Evansville, and to enable said city to change its corporate name to that of Lamasco, which was read the third time and passed the House by yeas 78, nays 3.
Mr. SHANKS called up the bill [S. 22] to legalize the acts of the board of trustees of the town of New Haven, in Allen county, which was read the third time and amended--by unanimous consent--so as to include the towns of Dunkirk and Salomonie, in Jay county, and then passed the House by yeas 78, nays 1.
A lengthy opinion of the attorney general relative to the fees collected by the auditor of state was read and referred to the committee on the investigation of the auditor's accounts.
Mr. SHAUCK called up his bill [H. R. 621] legalizing the levy and assessment of taxes by the city of Kendallville, Noble county, which was read the third time and passed the House by yeas 76, nays 1.
The House then adjourned.
The SPEAKER called to order at 8 o'clock and said that he had sought the lieutenant governor to inform him that the House would be in session during the remainder of the day, but learning that the lieutenant governor had left the city, and that there was no Senate in session to-night, this House could, therefore, do no business.
A message from the Senate was taken from the table and read, setting forth that the Senate had concurred in the resolution authorizing the payment of the committee appointed to investigate the Benevolent Institutions, with amendments for the pay of the short-hand reporter.
Mr. FAULKNER made an ineffectual motion to adjourn,
A call of the House was ordered and being taken, discovered 71 members present, when further proceeding under the call were dispensed with.
On the motion of Mr. HEROD the House took a recess for a few moments to allow the presentation of a testimonial of respect to the principal clerk of the House (Webster Dixon) from it is assistants.
Mr. MARSH called up the bill [S. 353] supplemental to an act concerning trusts and powers, approved June 17, 1853, which was read the third time.
And then the members separate
The secretary's minutes of yesterday's proceedings were read and referred to the committee appointed to revise the same.
Mr. WOOD offered a resolution for the equalizing of pay of employes of the Senate and
House of Representatives. It was referred to the
On motion by Mr. KAHLO, the House resolution authorizing the pay of the reading clerks of the Senate and House of Representatives at $6 each per diem was taken up; subsequently amended so as to give these clerks $1 a day extra, and then passed by yeas 28, nays 11.
On motion by Mr. SHAFFER, the Senate agreed to consider House bills on the first reading.
The bill [H. R. 11] to authorize boards of county commissioners to construct gravel
roads was read the first time and referred to the
Mr. WILSON moved to reconsider the vote by which the Senate agreed to consider House bills on the first reading.
Mr. SHAFFER objected to this motion.
Mr. HARRIS: It the sense of the Senate be only to dispose of the important measures in case a special session is called, the general appropriation bill should be taken up and the entire day put in on it.
The motion was agreed to, and the order for the consideration of House bills on the first reading was laid on the table.
Mr. MENZIES offered a resolution that the principal secretary and journal clerk be each allowed $300 for indexing and preparing for publication the journal of the Senate.
Mr. HARRIS moved to refer the resolution to the committee on public printing, with instructions to inquire what it is worth to make a proper index to the Senate journal.
Mr. REEVE offered a substitute, embracing a pro vision requiring a State officer to approve the work before payment is made.
On motion by Mr. REEVE the resolution and amendments were referred to a select committee of three, which the LIEUTENANT GOVERNOR subsequently made to consist of Messrs. Reeve, Kahlo and Major, together with an amendment proposed by Mr. RAGAN to reduce life amount to $100, and an amendment proposed by Mr. BURRELL to reduce the amount to $50.
Mr. HEFRON, by request, offered a concurrent resolution to pay the principal and assistant secretary of the Senate and of the House $300 each for similar services,
Mr. RAGAN moved to amend by reducing the amount to $100.
On motion by Mr. COMSTOCK the resolution and amendment were referred to the special committee on this subject.
Mr. LEEPER offered a resolution authorizing the state librarian to sell the copies of Davis' revised statutes returned to him by senators for $8 at 2$.
On motion by Mr. LANGDON, the resolution. was amended by authorizing this sale for the best price the librarian can obtain.
The resolution, as amended, was adopted.
A message was received from the House of Representatives announcing the appointment of a committee on the part of the House to act with a like committee on the part of the Senate, to wait on the governor and ascertain. if he has any further communication to make to this General Assembly, which, on motion, was taken up and concurred in.
The LIEUTENANT GOVERNOR made the committee on the part of the Senate to consist of Messrs. Wilson, Benz and Hart.
And then came the recess till 2 o'clock.
A message from the governor was received announcing that his excellency has reported his action upon all bills received, from the Senate.
Mr. WILSON, from the committee appointed, to wait on the governor, reported the performance of that service, and also a proclamation from his excellency convening the General Assembly in special session on Tuesday, March 11,1879. at 9 o'clock a. m.
Mr. REEVE, from the special committee thereon, returned the concurrent resolution
On motion by Mr. KAHLO the joint resolution [H. R. 22] accepting the surrender of the corporate franchise of the Woodburn Sarven Wheel company, and disincorporating said company, was read.
Mr. REEVE moved to amend, by appropriately inserting the words "and the said members shall remain individually liable for such debts," which was agreed to.
The resolution as amended was adopted by yeas 39, nays 1.
On motion by Mr. BURRELL, the bill [H. R. 22] to provide a homestead, and exempting it from sale on execution--$1,000 in value, real or personal, or both--was read the second time with a favorable report of a committee thereon.
Mr. REEVE moved to amend the report of the committee by substituting new matter for the bill--exempting a homestead not exceeding 40 acres of land with the residence and outbuildings thereon. He said every law of a class kind hurts the parties it is intended to protect, in almost every instance. Adopt, this amendment, and every one having deal with the debtor knows what is exempt; otherwise this bill would encouragee gambling. A man that trades on an uncertainty gambles to a certain extent, because he charges more in order to cover the uncertainty of chances. The right thing to do is to grant a homestead, and there let it end. The object is to induce men to purchase a home; to encourage saving and industry, and to encourage men to become permanent citizens. Under a homestead exemption, every man will be disposed to save every cent and put it into a house, and then if he can't make a living let him live within his means.
Mr. HARRIS moved to refer all bills on this subject to a committee, with instructions to bring in a bill to exempt a tract of land not exceeding 40 acres or worth more than $1,000 in value, when occupied by the householder as a home for himself and family. Mr. H. thought society is best served by encouraging every man to become a land holder, and thus interested in all the great interests of the common wealth. The rich man does not need any protection of this kind. He believed the true principle is to give every man a homestead. If personal property be exempted, the owner may have no credit.
Mr. LANGDON desired to see these bills printed, and made a motion to that effect.
Mr. KENT saw no necessity for printing these bills. The people prefer a homestead to an exemption law. He opposed the amendment, thinking it a discrimination in favor of those living in or near the larger cities, and thus unfair and unjust. The debtor should be permitted to choose what kind of property he would have exempted. He was willing to vote for the bill just as it came from the House, and regarded it as unnecessary to refer it to a committee at all.
Mr. HEFRON was of the opinion an exemption law was the best for Indiana now. A homestead would be best for the far West, but for Indiana, where the land is all occupied--where tens of thousands own no land, and probably never will--an exemption law is preferable. While it is true a homestead law would tend to make more landholders, but people will mortgage their homes, and a great majority of the people would not be benefited by a homestead. An exemption law from $500 to $1,000 is best, letting the debtor say which will be the most useful and profitable to him. This is an important piece of legislation, and he favored the motion to print.
Mr. SHIRK has been extremely anxious for some such legislation. He favored a homestead, but the amendment did not satisfy his ideas of what a homestead should be. A homestead amounting to $1,000 is not sufficient. To limit the value to that amount would not allow improvements on a small ten-acre trust in some places. The homestead should not be of less value than $2,000, which would afford a comfortable home. He favored the motion to print.
Mr. WILSON moved that the bill and amendments lay on the table and 100 copies be printed with the bill [S. 248].
Mr. FOWLER thought it a useless waste of money to print them all. It is better to recommit them first and let the committee agree before the printing is ordered.
The motion was agreed to.
On motion by Mr. COFFEY, the bill [H. R. 261] in relation to hedges or fences along public highways, was read the second time with a favorable report of a committee thereon, which was concurred in.
On motion by Mr. FOWLER the House resolution, authorizing pay for use of House committee rooms, was taken up.
Mr. FOWLER offered an amendment authorizing pay for Senate committee rooms.
Mr. LANGDON moved to amend the amendment by requiring a deduction of all sums received by the owner for the occupancy of any of said rooms since the hiring of said rooms to the Senate committees.
Messrs. FOWLER, GRUBB8, FOSTER and SARNIGHAUSEN thought that unless the committees have been discommoded, the contract price ought not to be cut down.
Mr. REEVE suggested the saving in the per diem of Janitors would more than cover the contract price of these rooms.
Mr. SHIRK knew of one occasion, at least, a committee of which he was a member could not obtain access to its room.
Mr. BURRELL considered it too late to cavil about whether the committees have had the use of these rooms or not; nothing is left now but to pay the contract price.
Mr. LANGDON favored the execution of contracts on both sides these rooms were to be granted exclusively for the use of committees, and, in plain violation of the contract, the rooms were occupied by guests; books and papers were missing, and the committees were inconvenienced thereby.
The motion to reject the amendment was agreed to--yeas 21, nays 15.
The amendment [Mr. Fowler's] was agreed to by--yeas 35, nays 1.
The resolution as amended was adopted.
On motion by Mr. REEVE the bill [S. 425] for the laying out of wards in cities of not less than 9,000 nor more than l3,000 inhabitants, according to the census of 1878, was taken up and the vote by which it was ordered engrossed was reconsidered (on one motion by one vote.)
Mr. COMSTOCK moved to indefinitely postpone this bill. It not only provides that the governor shall appoint commissioners to redistrict wards, but declares vacancies. It is the most remarkable bill that has been introduced in this Senate.
Mr. BURRELL demanded a call of the Senate, which being ordered and taken, discovered 37 members present and answering to their names.
On motion by Mr. HARRIS further proceedings under the call were dispensed, with by yeas 19, nays 18.
Mr. COMSTOCK demanded the previous
[A message from the House of Representatives was received [at 4:45 o'clock] announcing the passage by that body of a concurrent resolution that this regular session of the General Assembly adjourn sine die at 5 o'clock p.m.]
The main question was then ordered by--yeas 19, nays 18, and the motion to indefinitely postpone the bill was agreed to by--yeas 20, nays 18.
On motion by Mr. FOWLER [at 5:08 o'clock] the House resolution for a sine die adjournment was taken up and read.
Mr. HARRIS moved that the Senate adjourn.
The motion was agreed to.
And so, at 5 o'clock and 10 minutes, the Senate adjourned for the last time in the regular session in the year A. D. 1879.
The session was opened with prayer by Rev. Mr. SNODDY, representative from Hendricks county.
The journal of Saturday's proceedings was read, corrected and approved.
Mr. Gordon's bill [H. R. 644] to change the name of the Marion criminal circuit court
was read the second time and referred to the
Mr. English's bill [H. R. 645] to encourage literary, scientific and social culture was
read the second time and referred to the
The
Mr. CALDWELL offered a concurrent resolution that the pay of pages be increased 50 cents per day, which was rejected by--yeas 15, nays 64.
Mr. HEROD offered a concurrent resolution authorizing the speaker to sign a warrant for the per diem of Mr. Fleming a representative from Allen county for the entire session.
Mr. SHANK moved ineffectually to lay the resolution on the table--yeas 35, nays 45.
The resolution was then referred to the
Mr. OSBORNE of Elkhart, introduced a bill [H. R. 647] to protect the purity of the ballot box, which was read the first time and passed to the second reading.
Mr. GOLDEN (Mr. Osborne of Elkhart in the chair) offered a resolution of thanks to the Speaker for the impartial and faithful manner in which he di charged his duty.
Mr. THAYER, was glad of an opportunity to second a motion of this kind and endowed the resolution most heartily.
Mr MIERS offered a resolution authorizing the continuance of the Brevier legislative reports, at the same price and the same number of copies furnished every General Assembly since 1857, for 17 years.
On motion by Mr. SHANKS, it was referred to a special committee of three, with instructions to ascertain the probable cost.
Mr. SHANKS had never seen a more upright and just discharge of the duties devolving upon a speaker of the House of Representatives.
Mr. MARCH desired also to bear his testimony to the fair nd impartial manner in which the speaker had discharged his duties.
Mr. KELLEY said no man within his knowledge could have discharged the duties more faithfully and impartially,
Mr. MIERS could fully appreciate the duties of the speaker, and to fully appreciate the position members need only to occupy the chair a few hours, as he had done.
Mr. HESS and Mr. REED desired to give voice to the assertion that the speaker had been strictly impartial in his rulings.
Mr. HUBBARD said: "To appreciate the situation, just try it yourself."
Mr. WATSON declared that the speaker had so conducted the business of the session as to show that he was honest, capable, and impartial.
Mr. LINDLEY desired to acknowledge personal kindness, and to bear testimony to the efficiency of the speaker.
Mr. KIRKPATRICK had served the third time with the speaker, and fully appreciated the difficulties of the position.
Mr. WIMMER was convinced the speaker had faithfully performed his duty.
The resolution was then adopted by a unanimous rising vote.
Mr. JOHNSON offered a resolution of thanks to the clerks and door-keepers, which was adopted.
Mr. CARTER offered a resolution that the testimony taken in the matter of the investigation of the Southern prison be placed upon the journa1.
Mr. TAYLOR, of Daviess, said that inasmuch as none of the charges had been sustained, and as it was unnecessary to incumber the journal, he hoped the resolution would not pass. The investigation was searching.
Mr. WORKS did not think there was a member on the floor that knew what was in the testimony except the committee. There was no reason, as he could see, why this testimony should not go upon the journal of this House.
Mr. COPELAND was only asking that the notes of the clerk be incorporated in the House journal.
Mr. CARTER thought it no more than right that the testimony should be published, as there were facts therein that were not known until developed in that testimony.
The resolution was then adopted--affirmative 38, negative 28.
Mr. DAVIDSON offered a concurrent resolution, which was adopted, that a joint committee be appointed to wait upon the governor to ascertain whether his excellency has anything further to communicate to the House.
The SPEAKER made the committee to consist of Messrs. Davidson, Conner and Briggs on the part of the House.
Mr. LEHMAN offered a concurrent resolution for pay for rent of committee rooms, which was adopted.
Mr. GORDON submitted a protest against the passage of the congressional apportionment bill [H. R. 486] which was read.
Mr. HUMPHEYS moved that the protest be submitted to a committee of three to ascertain whether there was anything therein that should not be spread on the journal or against the constitution and the law, which was agreed to by yeas 53, nays 35.
The SPEAKER made the committee to consist of Messrs. Humphreys, Hubbard and Johnson.
The House con current resolution concerning the pay of members of the committee to investigate the benevolent institutions was returned from the Senate with amendments adding pay for a shorthand reporter, which were concurred in by yeas 78, nays 4.
Mr. STUCKER, explaining his negative vote, was opposed to this amendment ticking on a short-hand reporter for this committee. The committee should write out their own evidence, or call on some of the committee clerks of the House, who are under pay. He wanted to know how much was to be paid before action should be final on these amendments. He was opposed to concurring in the amendments of the Senate.
Mr. WILLARD introduced a bill [H. R. 648]
The House then took a recess till 2 o'clock.
The bill [S. 21] to establish courts in cities and towns having a population of 6,000 ; also the bill [S. 74] to alter and amend the charter of the town of Clarksville; also the bill [S. 392] to legalize the action of circuit courts in certain cases; also the bill [S. 313] to legalize sheriff's, administrator's, guardian's and commissioner's sales in certain cases; also the bill [S. 55] to legalize the incorporation of the Kokomo Building Loan Fund and Saving Association, were read the second time, and severally referred to appropriate committees.
The House then took a recess until 3 o'clock p. m.
The Speaker at 3 o'clock again commanding order
Mr. WILLARD introduced a concurrent resolution for per diem and mileage of witnesses in the State House investigation, making a total of $500.64, which was adopted.
Mr. COMPTON offered a concurrent resolution, which was adopted, allowing pay to the committee visiting the Northern and Southern prisons.
Mr. BEARSS presented a protest against the language used toward him by the contestor for his seat, and entered upon the journal of this House, denying that any votes were purchased by money or obtained in any other fraudulent manner.
Mr. DAVIDSON, from the select joint committee to wait upon the governor, reported that his excellency has nothing further to communicate than the annexed proclamation convening the Fifty first General Assembly in special session, on Tuesday, March 11,1879, at 9 o'clock a. m.
Mr. REED offered a concurrent resolution that the principal clerk be allowed the sum of $300 for preparing a calendar of business for the House journal, indexing, etc., etc.
Mr. HEROD moved to amend by adding that the assistant clerk shall have the same amount for indexing and proof reading of the House journal, which was accepted.
Mr. JOHNSON moved to further amend by striking out "$300" and inserting "$200," which was agreed to.
Mr. STUCKER wanted to be shown the law that allows $300 apiece extra to these clerks. He did not think there was any such law. They had their regular per diem of %6 per day, and he did not care what the custom had been in years gone by; these extravagances the people demanded now should be cut off. He denounced the resolution as wrong, and an outrage upon the tax-payers of the State. These gentlemen occupied these positions at $6 per day, and that was all he was willing they should have. He should oppose any resolution that authorizes the payment of money without warrant of law, and should, therefore, vote against concurring in this Senate amendment.
The resolution, as amended, was then adopted.
Mr. HUMPHREYS, from the special committee thereon, submitted a report on the protest of Mr. Gordon, that the accompanying maps be stricken oat, and, when so done, the protest be entered upon the journal. The report was concurred in, upon a division--affirmative 43, negative 35.
Mr. GORDON submitted a protest against referring his protest to a special committee, and the action of said committee in striking out a portion of said protest, and against the House concurring therein.
Mr. DAILEY offered a concurrent resolution that the members be allowed their expense for visiting the educational institutions of the State, which was adopted.
Mr. HUTHSTEINER introduced a bill [H. R. 649] to amend section 3 of an act to amend an act regulating foreign insurance companies, which was read the first time and passed to the second reading.
Mr. HANDY offered a concurrent resolution that the engrossing clerk, [M. E. Lock], be allowed the sum of $50 for extra services as Janitor for the engrossing and enrolling rooms.
It was laid on the table.
Mr. HUBBARD presented a memorial from the Society of Friends against capital punishment, petitioning for its repeal, and substituting therefor imprisonment for life.
Mr. SAINT presented a petition on temperance, signed by 11,090 citizens of Madison and Henry, and for prohibition if possible, and local option if they can not get anything else.
Mr. MARCH introduced a bill [H. R. 650] to amend sections 6 and 635 of the general practice act, which was read the first time and passed to the second reading.
The Speaker submitted his report for the warrants drawn for the per diem, mileage, etc , of members.
Mr. HUMPHREYS offered a concurrent resolution , which was adopted, that the Speaker
draw his warrant for $69.62 for amounts allowed for washing towels, etc., as reported
favorably by
Mr. FAULKNER offered a concurrent resolution, which was adopted, that the two Houses adjourn at 5 o'clock this p. m. sine die.
Mr. OSBORNE, from the
Mr. BLOCKLEY offered a concurrent resolution that Thos. McDaniel be allowed an extra pay of $2 per day.
The resolution was laid on the table.
Bills for acts were introduced, read the first time and severally passed to the second reading as follows:
By Mr MARCH, [H. R. 651] to amend section 350 of the general practice act.
By Mr. Nave, by request, [H. R. 652] to amend sections 15, 19 and 22 of an act to provide for the incorporation of towns, approved June 11, 1852.
By Mr. SAINT [H. R. 653] defining the terms of pike, plank, gravel and other toll roads.
By Mr. HEROD [H. R. 654] to provide for the release and satisfaction of judgments against persons at the time of being adjudicated bankrupts, and from the payment of which they have been duly discharged by the district courts of the United States.
By Mr. HEROD, [H. R. 655] to amend section 447 of the general practice act.
The SPEAKER said the time having arrived, according to a concurrent resolution
passed by the Senate and House for the adjournment of this present session, he would
conclude the labors thereof by saying that he had endeavored to do his duty as best
he could, and had given no distinction to any member on account of political
preferment. If he had failed in the discharge of hi duty it way the result of his
inability to accomplish it. He had done what he could to expedite the business of
the session and had even tried to detain members later than they seemed willing to
stay. If in the discharge1 of his duties he had seemed to do injustice or had
offended
The following bills were passed at the regular session, and signed by the governor:
Senate bill No. 60, an act to amend the act to divide the state into circuits for judicial purposes.
Senate bill No. 379, legalizing an annexation of platted territory to the city of Logansport.
Senate bill No. 39, authorizes railroads to extend their lines.
Senate bill No. 80, abolishes certain offices in cities and incorporated towns in the State.
Senate bill No. 277, an act concerning interest and usuary.
Senate bill No. 399, provides for the submission to the people for ratification the constitutional amendments.
Senate bill No. 4, repealing an act establishing a superior court in Wayne county.
Senate bill No. 6, an act to legalize acknowledgements of deeds, mortgagee, etc., taken by notaries who certified after the expiration of their commission.
Senate bill No. 30, authorizes guardians to settle the estates of deceased wards.
Senate bill No 32, allowing separate clerks to the two judiciary committees.
Senate bill No 58, concerns prisoners in jail.
Senate bill No. 101, authorizes incorporated cities to construct water works and issue bonds.
Senate bill No. 209, authorizes appeals from county commissioners to the Circuit and supreme courts relating to the removal of county court houses.
Senate bill No. 268 fixing the time for holding courts in the second judicial circuit.
Senate bill No. 65, fixing a penalty for libel, as amended in the House, to permit proof of the truth of the alleged libelous words.
Senate bill No. 184, to prevent oppression of citizens of the State by attachment suits brought in other States.
Senate bill No. 27, reorganizing the State prisons, and affording protection to convicts.
Senate bill No. 382, authorizing municipal corporations to annex conditions in voting aid to railroads.
Senate bill No. 69, creating a home for imbecile children at the Soldiers' Orphans Home at Knightstown.
Senate bill No. 383, legalizing the organization of the Kokomo Gas Light company.
Senate bill No. 207, providing a board to hear and determine all claims against the State.
House bill No. 112, for the reorganization and. better government of the State's benevolent institutions.
House bill No. 9, requiring surveyors, in locating corner stones, to place them so deep that the top will be on a level with the highway.
House bill No. 312, legalizing the acts of the Council of the town of Seymour.
House bill No. 565, limiting the powers of the County Board of Marion county to levy taxes and to create indebtedness.
A joint resolution was adopted authorizing. the Woodburn-Sarven Wheel Works to surrender its corporate franchises.
House bill No. 14, providing for caring for and keeping up cemeteries.
House bill No. 15, legalizing an election in the town of Edinburg.
House bill No. 55, legalizing acts of the commissioners of Clinton county in bidding in lands at sheriff's sale to protect the interests of the county.
House bill No. 56, reorganizing the tenth and twelfth judicial districts.
House bill No. 578, for the relief of the securities of John R. Bobbins, trustee of Union township, in Montgomery county.
House bill No. 122, authorizing cities to sell bonds to fund existing indebtedness at a lower rate of interest
House bill No. 231, legalizing acts of the trustees of Auburn, DeKalb county.
House bill No. 7, an act regulating the working of coal mines, and declaring a lien upon the works and machinery for work and labor in mining coal, and for the royalty on coal, and for the appointment of a mine inspector prescribing his duties, declaring an emergency, and providing penalties.
House bill No. 135, an act to legalize the acts of the board of trustees in the incorporated town of Shelburn, Sullivan county.
House bill No. 340. an act to fix the number of senators and representatives to the General Assembly of the State of Indiana, and to apportion the same among the several counties of the State.
Senators and members of the House of Representatives of the Fifty first General Assembly of the State of Indiana convened this day, Tuesday, March 11, 1879, at 9 o'clock a. m., in the Marion county Court House, in the city of Indianapolis, in pursuance of the following proclamation by His Excellency, the governor of Indiana:
A proclamation convening the Fifty-first General Assembly in special session, given as
Indianapolis, March 10,1879:
The Fifty-first General Assembly has consumed the time allotted to its regular session and is about to adjourn. Provision has not been made for the expenses of the State Government during the ensuing two years. Other important business has not been completed. The public welfare, in my opinion, requires a brief special session.
Therefore, I, James D. Williams, governor of Indiana, hereby call upon the (General Assembly of the State of Indiana to convene in special session on Tuesday, March 11, A. D. 1879, at 9 o'clock in the forenoon.
Members of the Indiana Senate having come together in the superior court room situate in the northeast corner of the Marion county court house
The LIEUTENANT GOVERNOR directed a call of the roll, which being taken, discovered the following senators as present, and answering to their names: .
Benz, John, of Crawford and Harrison; Briscoe, Thomas S., of Blackford, Jay and Grant; Burrell, Bartholomew H., Jackson and Washington; Cadwallader, Nathan, of Randolph; Coffey, Richard L., of Brown and Bartholomew; Comstock, Daniel W., of Wayne; Davis, Oliver P., of Vermillion and Parke: Dice,Francis M., of Fountain and Warren; Donham, Isaiah, of Vigo; Foster, Thomas J., of Allen; Fowler. Inman H., of Owen and Clay; Garrigus, Milton, of Howard and Miami; Grubbs, George W., Morgan and Marion; Harris, Addison C., of Marion; Hart, Thompson B., of Warrick and Pike; Hefron, David J., of Daviess and Greene; Kahlo, Charles, of Cass and Carroll; Kent, James V., of Clinton and Boone; Kramer, Henry, of Spencer and Perry; Langdon, Byron W.. of Tippecanoe; Leeper, David R., of St. Joseph and Starke; Major, George, of Benton, White, Jasper and Newton; Menzies, Gustavus V. of Posey and Gibson; Mercer, W. M., of DeKalb and Steuben; Moore, William A., of Decatur and Rush; Olds, Walter, of Whitley and Kosciusko: Peterson, Silas, of Montgomery; Poindexter, Moses, of Clark and Floyd; Ragan, W. H.. of Hendricks and Putnam ; Reeve, Charles H., of Marshall, Fulton and Pulaski; Reiley, William F., of Decatur, Jennings and Scott; Sarnighausen, John D., of Allen, Adams and Wells; Shaffer, Abner H., of Huntington and Wabash; Shirk, Benjamin, of Henry and Hancock; Smith, Marcus C., of Delaware and Madison; Tarlton, Caleb B., of Jonnson and Shelby ; Taylor, Samuel M., of Tipton and Hamilton; Traylor, William A., of Dubois, Martin and Orange; Treat, William B. F., of Monroe and Lawrence; Trusler, Milton, of Fayette, Union and Rush; Urmston, Stephen E., of Franklin and Dearborn; Viehe, Frederick W., of Knox and Sullivan; Wood, Thomas J., of Lake and Porter; Woollen, Levin J., of Switzerland, Ripley and Ohio: Wilson, Edwin R., of Jefferson.
Mr. REEVE: Mr. President, I see there is a quorum present.
The LIEUTENANT GOVERNOR announced all Senators present except Senators Benjamin L. Davenport [of Elkhart] A. D. Streight [of Marion] Elijah W. Weir [of Lagrange and Noble] and John H. Winterbotham [of Laportel who are absent on leave.
Mr. REEVE then offered a resolutlon declaring the officers of the extra session. DANIEL D. DALE, Principal Secretary, CHARLES W. WARD, Assistant Secretary and RICHARD HUNCHEON, Doorkeeper--as chosen to serve the special session.
It was adopted by yeas 34, nays 9. Mr. WARD and Mr. HUNCHEON taking the oath of office
On motion of Mr. VIEHE the rules of the regular session were adopted as the rules of the special session.
Mr. HARRIS offered a resolution for the consideration from day to day, till completed, of the State House and general and specific appropriation bills, in the order named. He thought if the Senate starts in a business way it might get through by the time the fee and salary committee is ready to report.
Mr. BURRELL moved to refer the resolution to a select committee of seven, consisting of three Democrats, three Republicans and one National, with instructions to report what business should be advanced on the calendar.
Mr. REEVE offered a substitute declaring it to be the sense of the Senate that the most important bills on the calendar shall have precedence, and to that end a committee of seven Democrats, six Republicans and one National shall be appointed by the chair to select such measures as shall be advanced on the calendar of business. He said whether it take five or twenty days the business of this Legislature should be done.
Mr. SHAFFER thought it inexpedient to delegate the right to a committee to indicate or dictate what bills shall be forwarded on the calendar. He favored the taking up of business in the regular order, believing senators are better able to judge for themselves than to place this matter in the hands of a committee.
Mr. GARRIGUS was very much of the same opinion. He disliked the idea of allowing a few members to run the Senate as they may choose.
Mr. KENT did not think the Senate would be discharging its duty unless it considered first the bills indicated in the original resolution, but the Senate itself should be the judge as to what business is of first importance, and not a committee.
Mr. HEFRON desired to see the most important bills first considered.
Mr. FOSTER opposed the appointment of a committee to dictate what the Senate shall consider first. He indicated a preference for the apportionment and other important bills.
Mr. OLDS desired to see the work of the session soon accomplished, so that members may return to their homes; but he was not willing to place such power as the resolution contemplates in the hands of a committee.
Mr. LEEPER moved as a substitute for the whole matter, that the Senate proceed to the consideration of the State House bill.
Mr. MENZIES favored this substitute. It is the simplest way to advance the business for which this session of the General Assembly has been called. Being anxious to get to work at the important measures on the calendar, he was willing to vote for the original resolution.
The LIEUTENANT GOVERNOR ruled out of order the last offered substitute [Mr. Leeper's]. He also ruled that neither the resolution nor the substitute would be binding only for to-day, as it otherwise would change a standing rule of the Senate.
Under the operations of the previous question, demanded by Mr. COFFEY, the substitute was rejected. The motion [Mr. Burrel's] was rejected, as was also the original resolution by--yeas 16, nays 27.
On motion by Mr. LEEPER--yeas 40, nays 3--the order of business was suspended, and the Senate agreed to proceed to the consideration of the State House bill.
Mr. REEVE, in casting his vote against this motion, when his name was called, explained by saying he would like to support the resolution, but in as much as he is informed there is a deficit in the treasury, and the appropriation will exceed the tax levy; and inasmuch as we must know how the treasury stands before acting advisedly on the subject, he would have to vote "no."
The House amendments to the Senate amendments to the State House bill, [H. R. 639] reducing the levy from "three" to "two" per cent., and appropriating $100,000 for the year 1880, and also declaring an emergency.
Mr. HARRIS moved that the Senate do not concur. If only a two cent levy be made it will not yield enough for next year, especially if there be any deficit in the treasury as is whispered about the Senate this morning. He desired a conference committee be asked for.
Mr. BURRELL moved to reject the emergency clause because it was attached by the House after the bill was transmitted to the Senate.
The LIEUTENANT GOVERNOR decided this a matter the Senate can take no notice of, in the absence of official knowledge.
Mr. DICE moved the Senate concur in the House amendments.
Mr. MENZIES stated that $100,000 will not be in the State treasury in 1880, so that part of the bill will be a nullity, and thus in effect reducing the appropriation to $540,000 for two years. The difference between the two and the three cent levy is about $80,000 or $85,000. If senators will consider the price of material now, the advantages of continuing this work, and many other things, the people surely will not complain of a three cent levy. The general levy is the lowest in the Union, and the people are fearful of having this public work extended over a long period of years, because experience shows the expenses pile up rapidly.
[A message from the House of Representatives announced the organisation of that body and its readiness to proceed with legislative business.]
Mr. REEVE saw a disposition on the part of members to stop deliberation by springing the previous question, and he warned members of the Senate that it would be an outrage upon the laws of the State and an outrage on the people to deliberately appropriate money that does not exist, and refuse to make provision to raise that money when they know it is not in existence and can be brought into existence only in one way. It is proposed to appropriate money from the Treasury which there is no means of putting there unless it is raised by a tax levy; and then provide in express violation of the constitution, that the money shall be borrowed to make up a deficit that is in no sense "a consol deficit."
Mr. DICE demanded the previous question.
Mr. REEVE demanded a call of the Senate, which, being taken, discovered 40 members present and answering to their names.
On motion by Mr. DICE further proceedings under the call were dispensed with.
The previous question was seconded, and the main question ordered. A division of the question being demanded by Mr. KRAMER, the part of the House amendments reducing the tax levy from three to two cents was concurred in by--yeas 20, nays 14; and the second part of the House amendments, appropriating from the general fund $100,000 for 1880, was rejected by--yeas 17, nays 22.
Mr. MENZIES explaining his negative vote: Believing the money would not be in the treasury voted "no" if it were possible for the money to be there he would cheerfully vote 'aye."
Mr. REEVE also explaining his negative vote, was opposed to providing extraordinary
means to put money in the treasury, when there is ample opportunity to provide ordinary
The result of the vote was then announced.
On motion by Mr. HARRIS a
Mr. SARNIGHAUSEN offered a resolution, which was adopted by consent: That the House be informed of the organization of the Senate.
Mr. HEFRON gave notice that to-morrow morning he should move to amend the rules of the Senate so as to prevent explanations at the time votes are given.
Then came the recess till 2 o'clock.
On motion by Mr. KRAMER, the Senate agreed to consider House bills on the third reading.
The bill [H. R. 158] in relation to
settlements made by boards of county commissioners with county townships or other
officers shall not be binding where the officer is a defaulter, was read, together
with amendments reported from the
Mr. REEVE regarded this as one of the most important bills of the session, as materially affecting the interests of many people in this State. He declared the amendments proposed by the committee if adopted would insure even-handed justice on all hands.
Mr. MOORE was satisfied if the Senate understood the purpose and provisions of this bill there would be but little objection to it. He could see no reason in treating a settlement as conclusive on an individual and not conclusive as to the State, as is proposed in the committee's amendments. Both should be given an equal chance; justice should be done by the State under all circumstances and at sill times to her humblest citizen. He felt an interest in this bill because he knew of parties who would suffer great hardship unless it becomes a law.
[While Mr. Moore was speaking he was interrupted by a communication from the House of Representatives inviting the Senate to a joint convention to near the governor's message; which invitation on his motion was accepted. He was again interrupted by the appearance of a committee from the House of Representatives [Representative Shanks and Briggs] appointed to escort the Senate to the hall of the House. Senators repaired to the representative's hall, and when they returned Mr. Moore resumed and completed his speech.]
Mr. REEVE insisted this bill would impair the obligations of contract--and would constitute the Senate a court of appeals. It authorizes, and, in advance, legalizes recklessness and inexcusable oversight in county treasurers and the bill is retroactive. Besides the last clause reinstates what is claimed to be stricken out by the substitute, and this puts the bill back in its original form. The bill is of this class.
Mr. TRUSLER hoped every Senator would examine the law. He believed the bill was worthy of passage. It is not mandatory in its character. This bill has been lobbied against more than it deserves. He was not lawyer enough to know whether the bill is exactly right, but if it is, it will relieve men who are deserving of relief. It simply means that mistakes may be corrected.
Mr. COFFEY hoped the substitute would not be adopted, as It Is substantially the original bill as it came from the House, the proviso of which must be absolutely wrong, and must have been prepared to meet a certain case in Fayette county. The bill would put it into the power of an outgoing and incoming treasurer to practice fraud on the tax-payers.
The substitute for the committee report was agreed to by--yeas 21, nays 20--and the bill placed on the calendar by consent.
The bill [H. R. 228] to enable the superintendent of public instruction and the auditor of Adams county to reopen accounts, so as to correct an error in the school fund, was read the third time and passed the Senate by--yeas 35,nays 1.
The bill [H. R 303] to legalize the acts of trustees of the town of Tell City, in all cases since the incorporation of said town, was read the third time and passed the Senate by--yeas 33, nays 2.
On motion by Mr. FOSTER, the amendments of the House to his bill [S. 22--New Haven legalizing bill] were read and concurred in.
On motion by Mr. HARRIS the House amendments to his bill, [S. 158] concerning married women, were read. He
moved that the Senate do not concur, and that a
Mr. KENT doubted the propriety of passing any bill on this subject.
Mr. LANGDON favored the motion--being opposed to the amendments.
Mr. MENZIES regarded the amendments as directly contradictory to the first section of the bill. The motion was agreed to and the PRESIDING OFFICER [Mr. Hefron in the chair] made said committee to consist of Messrs. Harris and Menzies.
And then the Senate adjourned.
This being the day and hour for convening the Fifty-first General Assembly of the State of Indiana in extra session, by proclamation of the governor, dated March 10, 1870, the members of the House of Representatives being assembled in the criminal court, room of the Marion County Court House, were called to order by Hon. JOHN GILBERT SHANKLIN, secretary of state, who said: Gentlemen, you have been convened in extraordinary session by proclamation of the governor. The members, as their names are called, will step forward and receive the oath of office at the hands of Chief Justice WM. E. NIBLACK.
Mr. GORDON said: Mr. Secretary--Before proceeding: to take the proposed oath, I desire to utter my protest against the reorganization of this House, It is, in my opinion, a plain violation of the law of parliament which makes the organization of the 9th of January last valid and subsisting until the expiration of the term for which the members of the House were elected. Of course, I do not object to repeating the oath already taken, for it can neither dd to nor detract from its obligation. That, once taken, is obligatory to the end of our term. It is, on the other hand, to presume my notion of the same, and assert my respect for it, that I now object to this whole proceeding. I believe that this House is now fully organized as it was at the last session; and see that we may do in that respect will be simply nugatory.
Mr. HUMPHREY: We are not acting under the law of Parliament, but under the law of Indiana, and. it has always been our custom here.
Mr. GORDON: It was a proceeding adopted. in 1859, when no party in the House had a
majority; and when a faction supposed they could gain a point by a reorganization, it
was
Mr. HUMPHREYS said he thought the House ought to be resworn, as there was not much work done during the regular session, and the oath taken at the commencement was about worn out.
The oath was then administered by Judge NIBLACK to members in groups of twenty- five.
E. Reicheldafer and O. E. Fleming, of Allen; Joseph S. Daily, of Adams and Wells; Joseph Davis. of Boone; A. 1. Galbraith, of Brown and Bartholomew; Charles E. Schol', of Carroll; I. M. Compton, of lay; James F. Stucker, of Crawford and Orange; F. B. Caldwell, of Clinton; Samuel H. Taylor, of Daviess; A. Alden, of Dearborn; Thomas Hart, of Dubois and Martin; Samuel Shutt, of DeKalb; J. H. Willard, of Floyd; J. Shannon Nave, of Fountain: B. H. Flodder, of Franklin; J. Norman Davidson, of Gibson; A. Humphrey, of Green; A. C. Handy, of Hancock; D, A. Cunningham, of Harrison; Henry Drover, of Huntington; J. T. Shields of Jackson; Charles O. Lehman, of Johnson; Henry S. Cauthorne of Knox; A. J. Hosmer, of Laporte; Lycurgus Dalton, of Lawrence; S. W. Edwins, of Madison; Exum Saint, of Madison and Henry : W. E. English, of Marion and Shelby: James Confer, of Marshall; R. W. Miers, of Monroe; J. Maurice Thompson, of Montgomery; Jacob Shauch, of Noble; J. D. Osborne, of Noble and Elkhart; B Schweitzer, of Owen; Russell Allen, of Putnam; Gustav Huthsteiner, of Perry; Joseph D. Barker, of Pike; Russell Blockley, of Posey; J. H. Drake, of Ripley; C. R Faulkner, of Ripley, Rush and Decatur; J. H. Bryant, of Spencer; John C. Brings, of Sullivan; 'Squire Vanpelt, of Shelby; William Perry, of Starke, Fulton and Pulaski; Henry Ginz, of St. Joseph; T. J. Garroutte, of St. Joseph and Marshall; Clarke Baker, of Tippecanoe; J. N. Kester and R. Van Valzah, of Vigo; John L. Taylor, of Warrick; S. H. Mitchell, of Washington : James B. Tully of Whitley; Benjamin F. Campbell, of Cass;John A. Donnell, of Decatur; Walter March, of Delaware; J. P. C. Shanks, of Delaware and Jay; E H. Stevens, of Elkhart,: .T. W. Connoway, of Fayette and Union; O.P. H. Carey, of Grant: James T. Arnold, of Grant and Blackford; T. J. Lindley, of Hamilton; G. W. Snoddy, of Hendricks; C. S. Hubbard, of Henry; Thomas M,. Kirkpatrick, of Howard; Alexi Hess, of Huntington and Wabash; John M. Golden, of Jefferson; Smith Vawter, of Jefferson, Jennings and Scott; John Overmeyer, of Jennings; E. N. Thayer, of Kosciusko; Arthur G. Copeland, of Kosciusko and Fulton; T. S. Fancher, of Lake; O. B. Taylor, of Lagrange; W. W. Herod, J. W. Gordon, J. B. Conner, C. B. Robinson, of Marion; Albert C, Bearss, of Miami; G. I. Reed, of Miami and Howard; James M. Rodman, of Newton and Benton ; Robert Kelley. of Parke.; S. S. Skinner, of Porter; Enos L. Watson., of Randolph; George B. Sleeth, of Rush; Ezekiel Brown, of Steuben; Edward Robinson, of Tippecanoe; John S. Hopkins and J. W. Messick, of Vanderburg; Jesse Arnold, of Wabash; Nathaniel Harlan, J. A. Thornburg, of Wayne: A. R. Owen, of Warren; James Osborne, of Vermillion; George H Brown, of Jasper and While; Win. W. Rooker, of Hamilton and Tipton; J. D. Works, of Ohio and Switzerland; N. S. Majors, of Morgan; Archibald Johnson, of Montgomery and Parke; W. Wimmer, of Hendricks and Putnam; W. B. Carter of Clarke.
Mr. JOHNSON said from announcements, he supposed these were propositions for the organization of the House of Representatives from both the leading political parties, and inasmuch as he was not a member of either, he offered a resolution which was read. It provides for the organisation of the House of Representatives as it stood during the regular session ; For Speaker, HENRY CAUTHORNE, a representative from the county of Knox; for principal clerk, WEBSTER DIXON, of Jackson county; for assistant clerk, THOMAS C. MAYS, of DeKalb; for doorkeeper, DAVID B. WILSON, of Shelby.
Mr. OWEN moved to amend by striking out the name of Mr. CAUTHORNE and inserting the name of Mr OVERMEYER in lieu.
Mr. SHANKS obtained leave to enter his protest against the organization of the House by resolution.
Mr. CALDWELL moved to lay the amendment on the table.
The yeas and nays were demanded, and being ordered and taken thereon, resulted--yeas 56, nays 37.
So the amendment was laid on the table.
Mr. OVERMEYER desired to call attention to the constitution, and he read article 2 section 13. He insisted that the only constitutional organization was by election. He, therefore, moved that the resolution lie on the table.
The yeas and nays were demanded, and being ordered and taken, resulted--yeas 38, nays 55.
So the House refused to lay the resolution on the table.
Mr. HUMPRHREYS demanded the previous question, which was seconded by the House--yeas 56, nays 38--and under its operations thee resolution was adopted by yeas 59, nays 2--present and not voting 36.
The secretary of state then declared the Hon. HENRY S. CAUTHOURN duly chosen speaker of the House of Representatives for the special session.
Mr. CAUTHORNE after taking the oath of office said he was thankful for the expression of confidence. He had no promises to make, but would await until the close of the session, and then leave the members of the House to judge how he had performed the duties of the chair.
Mr. SHANKS entered his protest against the election by resolution which was read and ordered spread on the Journal.
Mr. OVERMEYER introduced a bill [H. R. 659] prescribing certain duties of the Auditor of State, which was read the first time and passed to the second reading.
Mr. LEHMAN offered a resolution, which was adopted, that the rules of the regular session be, and the same are hereby adopted as the rules for the special session.
Mr. JOHNSON offered a resolution which was adopted, that the Senate be informed of the organization of the House.
Mr. ENGLISH offered a concurrent resolution that this session of the General Assembly adjourn sine die on Monday, March 17,1879.
Mr. SLEETH offered a substitute that the State House and specific appropriation bills be completed, and that then this session adjourn.
The substitute was ruled out by order of the Speaker.
Mr. OVERMEYER offered a substitute that it is the duty of the General Assembly at this special session, to proceed at once the completion of the appropriation bills, to the end that only a brief special session may be required, which was adopted--yeas 78, nays 13.
Mr. ENGLISH offered a resolution fixing the adjournment for Tuesday, March 18,1879, which was rejected by--yeas 35, nays 52.
Mr. FAULKNER offered a resolution that the standing committees have no use for
Mr. LEHMAN offered a resolution that a committee of three be appointed to wait upon the governor and ascertain whether His Excellency desires to make a communication to this General Assembly.
The SPEAKER made the committee to consist, of Messrs. Lehman, Briggs and Reed.
The House tools a recess till 2 o'clock,
Mr. ROBINSON offered a resolution that the seats of members be declared vacant, and that they proceed 10 select seats by lot.
On motion of Mr. FAULKNER the resolution was laid on the table.
Mr. SHIELDS called up the bill [S. 180] in relation to divorces, multiplication of marriages, etc., was read the third time, and. passed the House by--yeas 66, nays 6.
A message from the Senate announced the organization of that body, and that it had re- fused to concur in the House amendments to the bill [H. R. 637] for the construction of the new State House, and asked for a committee of conference on the disagreement between the two Houses.
On the motion of Mr. OVERMEYER the SPEAKER appointed as such committee on the part of the House, Messrs. Overmeyer and Dalton.
Mr. SHUTT called up his bill [H. R. 192] to legalize the official acts of the officers or the town of Butler, DeKalb county, which was read the third time and passed the House by yeas 78, nays 0.
Mr. SLEETH called up his bill [H. R. 583] to authorize incorporated towns to light with gas, and that a special tax be levied for the purpose,contracts to last but one year, which was read the third time and passed the House by yeas 80, nays 1.
Mr. LEHMAN from the committee appointed to wait upon the Governor report the discharge of that duty and that his Excellency would like to communicate with the General Assembly this afternoon at 3 1/2 o'clock p m, and the committee recommend that the General Assembly meet in joint convention this afternoon at 3 1/2 o'clock. The report was concurred in and Messrs. Shanks and Briggs appointed a committee to escort the Senate to the House of the Representatives.
Mr. SNODDY called up bis bill [H. R. 238] to amend section 647 of the general practice act, which was read the third time and passed the House by yeas 79, nays 0.
The hour having arrived for the joint convention and Senators being seated on the right of the Speaker's desk--the LIEUTENANT GOVERNOR being seated on the right of the Speaker.
The LIEUTENANT GOVERNOR, by consent of the joint convention, appointed Senator Wood and Representatives Lehman and Golden a committee to wait upon the governor and inform his excellency that, the joint convention was now ready to receive his communication.
The committee crossing the hall to the governor's room immediately returned and reported that his excellency had sent with the committee his executive messenger [Samuel K. Downey] bearing a message in writing, which he handed to the Lieutenant governor.
The message having been read by the clerk of the House of Representstives, as follows:
I regret that I have been compelled to cause you to convene in special session
to complete the business which should have been accomplished during the regular
session which closed yesterday. In concluding my biennial message, I expressed
the hope that, realizing the limited term for which you were convened, you might
be able at an early day to consider the matters communicated to you, and that
your most important business might not be delayed until the confusion incident
to the closing hours of the session should involve you in errors which you would
afterwards regret. The present condition of your business justifies the
admonition which the experience of many years then had taught me, I presume that
I may not officially know what has created this emergency, but the people, whose
servants we are, will in due time fix the responsibility where it belongs and
administer the chastisement which faithless and incompetent representatives may
always expect from. an outraged constituency. During the 59 days ending Saturday
last and before the "two days next previous to the final adjournment" had
commenced to run, the joint committee on enrolled bills presented to me 18 bills
which had originated in the Senate and 12 which had originated in the House of
Representatives, these being 30 in all I have signed. They constitute the
legislation upon which you must have been judged without the opportunity now
afforded you by the exercise of the constitutional power vested in me. An
examination of these acts suggests that our modern idea of legislation not only
contemplates a special session at the conclusion of each regular session of the
General Assembly, but in addition expects that a large part of that time shall
be devoted to setting right the errors or town and city officers and other
agents of the people, defining existing law's, relieving sureties on official
bonds, changing judicial circuits to accommodate personal prejudices against
presiding judges, changing the terms and time of holding court in counties to
suit the convenience of a select few at the expense of the mass of the people
who have become accustomed to the existing calendar; enacting under the forms of
general law that which is of necessity local and special and in direct violation
of the constitution, and thus, while affording to small localities the temporary
relief given by an act of doubtful sufficiency, leave the, measures for which
the people of the whole State have long waited to fall into confusion and
neglect. Twelve of the acts received and signed may be classified with those
described. One undertakes to satisfy and confirm a large part of the omissions
of duty incident to the organization and management of the city government to
which it applies. Ordinances by number without other description, are accepted
as wholesome for the community amenable to that form of law, and ratified and
approved, save that by a variance between the title and the body of the act, 10,
whose irregularity is by titled promised a cure, are omitted and left to be
healed two years hence. By one act you set apart $125,000 for the payment of
your expenses, and by another you increased your corps of employes by the
addition of two clerks of committees. A superior court constituted for Wayne
county by the last General Assembly is abolished, and you have disposed with a
part of our expensive machinery for the assessment of taxes in towns and cities.
The act requiring that prisoners in jail be put at some useful work is valuable
in our populous localities. The act permitting guardians to settle the estates
of deceased wards is commendable, and I trust will lead to other needed reforms
of that nature. You have enacted a few good and highly important laws. Having
agreed to seven of the proposed amendments to the con-[stitution]
I renew my recommendation on the subject of fees and salaries. It is expected that you will pass a law fixing the fees and salaries of your State, county and township officers, giving them a fair compensation for the services, making the law so plain that there can be no misconstruction of any of its points. Such a law I shall cheerfully sanction.
It is of great and pressing importance that you at once consider and pass a bill for an act making appropriations for the support of the State government during the two years from November 1, 1879. The act now in force was enacted March 6, 1877, and was designed to include in itself and become a substitute for all existing laws authorizing the payment of money from the general fund. It has been thus construed and administered. It lacks non of the force of law. By it terms it repeals the law and fragments of laws then in force, which had authorized unexpected drafts upon the treasury, and limited the amounts and objects. Salaries are provided for by it which had before been paid out of miscellaneous appropriations, and did note appear upon the face of the acts of appropriation.
In this connections I may say that in making provision for the administration of the office which I now have the honor to hold, you may not deal justly by its important and increasing business when you adjust your appropriations to those who are for the time being in its service. The provision which you may make will apply to and affect the next administration of the office quite as much as the present incumbent. The system of business which prevails has been perfected by years of experience and painstaking care, and deserves at least an examination, before it is condemned as useless, or degraded by being placed upon a level with branches of the public service for an entirely different character.
The bill for an act making appropriations for specific objects services immediate consideration. An appropriation for improvements at the Southern prison is a matter of great importance. The addition to the building of the Hospital for the Insane to be used as the department for "women" has ben erected during the past four years, at a cost of $600,000, and awaits an appropriation to complete and furnish it for the accommodation of the hundreds who needs its care and protection in their pitiable condition. I trust that you will not fail to make a sufficient appropriation, say $62,000, to pay the indebtedness of the Sate Board of Agriculture. The State has already acquired an interest in its land to the amount of $25,000, but it is only in the nature of second mortgage. I recommend that you make the appropriation in order to save the State' interest, as well as the State Boards--the State to be the owner in fee simple until such time as the property can be sold to advantage, and then , after reimbursing the State, should there be anything left, that it be given to the State Board. When in 1855, the State University was in danger of losing its endowment by a judgment obtained by the trustees of Vincennes University against the State defending for persons who had purchased lands supposed to belong to it, the State very generously assumed the whole amount, being nearly $70,000, and has paid it with a large amount of interest on the bonds issued for the purpose. Now, if the State could afford to make a donation of that amount to one university, she can surely afford to appropriate the money required to ave the property of the farmers and mechanics of the whole State, especially as the State will become the owner of the property. I sincerely hope that you will at once complete your consideration of the bill providing means to continue the work the new State House, and enact it into a law. The slight disagreements as to the manner of raising the money can be speedily reconciled by a full and free consultation, when all shall come to realize the advantages of an immediate prosecution of the work in a time so favorable to permanence and cheapness, The subject of expert evidence, to which I called your attention in my former communication, has received an early and marked illustration in the attempt of architects who testified before your committee of investigation in to the New State House matters to procure an allowance at the rate of $20 per day, for the attendance as witnesses, and that, too, after some of them had been afforded their education at the public expense, I renew and press upon you the recommendation that you remedy this evil, and that you put it beyond the power of courts to allow, or witnesses to demand and receive such unreasonable fees.
I again urge that you repeal the law authorizing each county to send two students to each university free of charge, and that you require all students alike to pay a reasonable tuition fee.
My recommendation upon the subject of executive clemence has been brought to your notice again by the printed copies of the bienial report for 1877 and 1878. I desire your careful and deliberate judgment upon the facts thus fully communicated to you, and if, in your opinion it is not wise to make the change authorized by the constitution, I will be glad if the care bestowed upon that branch of the business of this office may commend it to your approbation.
As suggested in my proclamation, I believe that your session under this call should be brief, and I assume that it will be your pleasure to insure that desirable result by a prompt, diligent and harmonious disposition of the measures of public interest which I have enumerated.
The LIEUTENANT GOVERNOR declared the joint convention adjourned, it having accomplished the purpose for which it was convened.
When senators had retired.
Mr. STEVENS called up his bill [H. R. 397] to require petitions for location, vacation or change of highway, to give bond for costs in case the commissioners should report adversely, which was read the third time and passed the House by yeas 74, nays 5.
Mr. STUCKER called up his bill [H. R. 610] to
legalize the election in May, 1878, of the town of Paoli, Orange county, which was
read the
Mr. Taylor, of Lagrange, called up his bill [H. R. 616] to define the boundaries between the counties of Washington and Clark, which was read the third time.
Mr. SHAUCK said that in behalf of the people he represents he would oppose the passage of this bill.
Mr. OWEN moved that the bill lie upon the table, which was agreed to.
Mr. TAYLOR, of Warrick, called up the bill [S. 169] to prevent persons who are mortgagors of personal property from disposing of the same, which was read the third time, and passed the House by--yeas 63, nays 4.
Mr. HUBBARD offered a concurrent resolution that room "G," at the Occidental Hotel, be retained at $1.50 per day, and the doorkeeper $1 per day for attending to the same, and that witnesses' fees be allowed, etc.
Mr. LEHMAN moved, ineffectually, to amend so as to strike out all relating to the doorkeeper.
The resolution was then adopted by--yeas 47, nays 29.
Mr. SHAUCK offered a resolution,which was adopted, that inasmuch as the enrolling of the bills of the House had been poorly done, that the principal employ such clerks as are competent to do the work.
The House adjourned.
The LIEUTENANT GOVERNOR announced his appointment of the standing committees of the regular session to serve as such for the special session. He also reappointed the pages of last session.
Mr. WOODS offered a joint resolution requesting the Legislature of Illinois to remove the dam at Momence, Illinois, across the Kankakee river, and to permit her citizens and the citizens of Indiana to cut a channel through the rock above the said dam, and thereby enable the citizens of Indiana to successfully drain and reclaim a vast area of wet lands [about 800,000 acres] bordering the Kankakee river. He read an argument in favor of the passage of his resolution.
Mr. LANGDON regarded it as a question whether the Momence dam was the impediment which causes the overflow of so many acres of land in this State. If it is worth while for the General Assembly to legislate on this subject, it should be brought forward in a different shape, he proposed work involves a vast expenditure of money. He favored any method by which this vast tract of land could be reclaimed.
Mr. TREAT considered the resolution not what it should be. In his opinion the proper way would be to ascertain the facts by the making of an actual survey, and it it be found that the dam is an impediment, then this Legislature could understandingly take some steps of this kind.
Mr. COMSTOCK regarded this as an important resolution, and moved that a committee of three be appointed to examine and report on the subject, desiring not to be appointed thereon himself.
Mr. WOOD thought it useless to survey first and then petition.
Mr. STREIGHT hoped the committee would take immediate steps to push this work forward. It is a little less than a disgrace to the State to allow so large a tract of land to lie under water, when it could, so easily be drained.
The motion to refer was agreed to, and the PRESIDING OFFICER [Mr. Kent in the chair] made said committee to consist of Messrs. Wood, Langdon and Leeper.
Mr. FOSTER offered a resolution directing the chairmen of committees not to employ clerks at this special session.
On motion of Mr. BENZ it was laid on the table by--yeas 31, nays 11.
Mr. OLDS offered a resolution requiring the secretary of the Senate to keep on hand a sufficient quantity of lithograph letter-heads and envelopes for the use of the Senate, which was adopted by--yeas 24, nays 14.
Mr. SHIRK introduced a bill [S. 444] to provide
for the organization and support, of an asylum for the feeble minded children, and to
repeal the act on the same subject approved on the 7th of this month, was read the first
time, and referred to the
The resolution [H. R. 29] allowing pay to principal and a assistant clerks of both Houses--$200 each--for indexing, etc., the journals, was read and laid on the table.
The resolution [H. R. 21] requesting Senators and Representatives in Congress to procure the enactment of a law making an appropriation of $82,286.31 to pay Morgan raid claims, being read--
Mr. WILSON declared the resolution could not hurt the State, and was but an act of justice to people in the southern portion of the State, and he saw no necessity for reference to a committee. The facts were well understood; it would not take a dollar from the State treasury, but was only to reimburse our own citizens who suffered by this raid. He urged the passage of the resolution now.
Mr. STREIGHT also favored the passage of the resolution.
Mr. REILEY regarding these claims as just, desired to see favorable action taken without delay.
Mr. BENZ represents one of the counties which had three miles destroyed in the Morgan raid, and had horses taken by troops on both sides; and he thought it but right that the United States should pay the damage.
The resolution was adopted, by yeas 35, nays 5.
The House concurrent resolution, allowing expenses of members of the prison committees
in visiting the State prisons; also, the House concurrent resolution, allowing $69.65 to
certain persons, for what not stated; also, the House concurrent resolution, to members
of the House committees for expenses in visiting State institutions, were severally
referred to the
The following described bills were read the first time and severally referred to appropriate committees:
The bill [H. R. 20] to provide for a State bureau of statistics and geology; the bill [H. R. 58] to amend section 1 of the act declaring agreements to pay attorneys' fees illegal and void; the bill [H. R. 47] to enable the owners of wet lands to drain and reclaim the same, etc; the bill [H. R. 82] in relation to foreign express companies, defining their duties, etc.; the bill [H. R. 89] touching contempt of court, prescribing methods of proceeding therein; the bill [H. R. 114] to legalize certain building, loan and savings associations; and the bill [H. R. 138] authorizing township trustees to supply surplus funds to road purposes.
The House amendments to the bill [S. 125] to provide punishment for persons having in their possession stolen personal property, the same having been stolen in another State or Territory, were read.
Mr. REEVE stated the amendments leave the bill so it will refer only to goods stolen in this State--which goes no further than the present law. He moved to amend the House amendment by appropriately inserting the words, "in any other State and been brought into this State"
The amendment was agreed to, and the House amendments as amended were concurred in.
The Senate took a recess till 2 o'clock.
Mr. SHIRK, from the
On motion by Mr. COMSTOCK the House amendments to his bill [S. 280] supplementary to the public library act of February 16,1852, reducing the tax from "two" to "one" cent, was concurred in.
Mr. HARRIS, from the
Mr. REEVE desired to preserve the Integrity and credit of the State. He moved the bill be laid on the table till a statement shall come from the Treasurer showing how much surplus money will be in the State Treasury at the end of this and the next fiscal year under the existing tax levy.
Mr. HARRIS said all the information sought by this motion will be found on page 14 of the Auditor's last printed report.
Mr. STREIGHT aid not see any difficulty in the way of passing this bill now, and he hoped that would be done--the Senate having yielded almost everything asked for by the House of Representatives.
Mr. HEFRON was willing to rely upon the published estimates of the State auditor, and insisted upon instant concurrence in the report of the committee.
Mr. REEVE insisted that the State treasurer expects a deficiency in the treasury made up from actual data in the office. Then how can this Legislature make an appropriation out of funds where there will be atf200,000 deficiency? He desired to provide against the increase of extraordinary power by the State officers to procure means with which to carry on the Government.
The motion. to lay on the table [Mr. Reeve's] was rejected by yeas 11, nays 31.
Mr. LANGDON understood there was no limitation on the State officers as to how much the length of time or rate of interest on loans they may make, and consequently he was opposed to the passage of this measure unless amended in this particular.
The report of the
Mr. HARRIS moved to take up the specific appropriation bill.
Mr. BURRELL made an ineffectual motion--yeas 10, nays 34--to lay this motion on the table.
The motion was agreed to.
The bill [H. R. 610] making specific
appropriations for the years 1879 and 1880, was read the second time, together with
amendments proposed by the
The amendment proposing to increase the appropriation for the completion of the new Insane Hospital from $23,000 to $94,000 being read--
On motion by Mr. DICE, the bill and report was laid on the table, and 100 copies ordered printed.
The bill [H. R. 179] to prevent the
manufacture and sale of adulterated commercial fertilizers, was read the first time
and referred to the
The bill [H. R. 261] in relation to fences and hedges along public highways was read the third time and passed by yeas 34, nays 3.
The bill [S. 51--Mr. Grubbs'] to amend section 22 of the town incorporation act of June 11, 1852, was read the third time,
Mr. GRUBBS explained the provisions of his bill, it allows towns to regulate the sale of intoxicating liquors, by re-enacting substantially the law of 1877.
Mr. TRAYLOR opposed the bill. It would be the means of creating large indebtedness in towns, and would be a good bill in the interest of drug stores. It is impossible to do away with the use of intoxicating liquors by legislative enactment. This bill would probably prevent the retailing of light wines in towns; and instead of a man taking a drink of light wines he would take a jug of whisky home with him. The use of light wines is not injurious.
Mr. GARRIGUS favored the bill.
Mr. GRUBBS believed in regulating the sale of liquor in every possible way as long as the State licenses it. The law has operated well and he believed it ought to be placed on the statute book again. For that reason he introduced this bill.
The bill passed by--yeas 35, nays 6.
The bill [S. 62--Mr. Comstock's] to make stockholders individually liable for double the amount of their stock, was read the third time and passed by--yeas 29, nays 9.
The bill [S. 78--Mr. Shirks, fully described in
The bill [S. 79--Mr. Reeve's, described in these reports January 14] concerning contracts for public works was read the third time, and passed by yeas 36, nays 0.
The bill [S. 83--Mr. Leeper's] to amend section 9 of the justices' act of June 9,1852, so where parties live in different townships suit may be brought in either, was read the third time and passed by yeas 29, nays 8.
The bill [S. 27--Mr. Reeve's] providing who may practice medicine and surgery and carry on the business of apothecary and pharmaceutist was read the third time and failed to pass for want of a constitutional majority yeas 23, nays 18.
The bill [S. 297--Mr. Hefron's] to abolish, the office of State geologist.
Mr. STREIGHT hoped the bill would not pass. As there is a bill here from the House intimately connected with this, proposing to establish a Bureau of Statistics, he moved to refer it to the committee having that bill in charge, which motion at the suggestion of the senator from Wayne (Mr. Comstock] he changed to a motion to lay the bill on the table.
The latter motion was agreed to by yeas 31, nays 8.
The bill [S.333--Mr. Donham's] requiring the muzzling of dogs from 6 o'clock a. m. to 6 o'clock p. m., and relieving from a dog tax all townships where there is a surplus fund derived from taxes on dogs, was read the third time.
Mr. TRAYLOR opposed the bill because it will to some extent cripple the school fund, by lessening the revenue from the dog tax.
The bill failed to pass yeas 18, nays 20.
And'then the Senate adjourned.
The journal of yesterday's proceeding was read only in part.
A message from the Senate announced the failure of that body to concur in The amendments of the House to the bill [S. 158] concerning married women.
By direction of the House the speaker appointed as a conference committee on the part of the House of Representatives Messrs. March and Dailey.
Mr. WIMMER offered a resolution that so much of the resolution, passed by the House on yesterday, dismissing all committee clerks, as refer to the clerks of the three groups authorized by law be rescinded.
On the motion of Mr. FAULKNER the resolution was laid on the table by--yeas 45, nays 43.
Mr. THAYER called up his bill [H. R. 416] giving circuit courts jurisdiction by affidavit (with information) over felonies, which was read the third time.
Mr. THAYER believed It would be a very great saving of money in every county, and would meet the approval of the people generally.
Mr. ALLEN, of Putnam, believed the provisions of this bill would save time and money and work no injustice to any person. He believed that felonies may be as well prosecuted on information derived through township courts, viz: Justices of the Peace, as upon indictments from grand juries, before which one aide of the testimony only is taken,
Mr. WATSON said the bill he introduced, and now engrossed, was a much better bill than the one now before the House.
Mr. WORKS thought Mr. Watson's bill, H. R. 32, was the better bill, and asked that it be read for information. It provides that felonies may be prosecuted in the circuit and criminal courts by affidavit and information for felony, when no grand jury is in session, when an indictment has been found by grand jury, and has been quashed, and where appeals to the supreme court have been reversed on account of defects in the indictment.
Mr. THAYER was satisfied that this was a better bill, and he moved to take up Mr. Watson's bill, H. R. 32, in on the same subject, which was agreed to, and the bill [H. R. 416] was laid on the table.
The bill [H. R. 32] then passed the House by yeas 87, nays 1.
Mr. SAINT arose to a question of privilege and offered the following:
Whereas, The House of Representatives of the Fifty-first General Assembly of the State of Indiana have had at the regular session, just closed, besides the ordinary duties pertaining to that body, the duties imposed by the election of United States senator, the apportionment of the State into legislative and congressional districts, the investigation of the charges against the board of State House commissioners and against the board of benevolent institutions; and,
Whereas, The members of said House of Representatives of all political parties eschewing partisan considerations to an extent unprecedented in former legislative bodies of this State, have labored unceasingly almost to secure daily legislation as the interests of their constituents and the State demand; and,
Whereas, They have passed and forwarded to the other branch of the department near 100 important bills, and acted on a large number received from that body; and because it, is no fault, neglect or lack of duty on the part of the House that no greater amount of legislation has been accomplished; and,
Whereas, The governor, James D. Williams, in what, purports to be a message, and communicated, second-handed, to this House on yesterday so far forgot the dignity of and respect due to a co-ordinate branch of the State Government as to rebuke and criticise its doings in the regular session of this House just past, and to attempt to bring it into disrepute and public ridicule by undignified and undeserved criticism of its proceedings; and,
Whereas, no amount of pandering to a vulgar prejudice against public servants by one branch of the State Government will restore the confidence that the people are fast losing in that deparment of said Government,
Therefore, be it resolved by the House of Representatives, that said pretended message is an insult, not only to the representatives of the people, but to the people themselves, and
Resolved further, That the speaker of the House appoint a committee of five members to consider said pretended message, aid report to this body such action thereon as they may deem necessary for the vindication of an equal and independent co-ordinate branch of the State Government.
On the motion of Mr. TULLEY the resolution was laid on the table by--yeas 50, nays 35.
Mr. THOMPSON, explaining, said he thought the governor's message was not quite
respectful,and wholly lacks the dignity of a state paper but I can not agree to any
action of this house looking to an undignified retort upon the executive. It is our duty
to preserve our character as a sincere body representing the people. We can not do this
by condescending to censure what of itself will stand as a monument to the governor's
discrimination, ability and fitness to fill the office, which ought to reflect the
refinement and culture of the State. It seemed to him that the governor has not done
Mr. Owen's bill [H. R. 225] to compel railroad companies to destroy and prevent the spread Canada thistles along the track and railroad lands, was passed.
On the motion of Mr. THAYER 15,000 copies the governor's message was ordered for the use of the House, 10,000 in the English and 5,000 the German language, were ordered printed.
Mr. THOMPSON called up Mr. Johnson's bill, [H. R. 209] to amend section 4 of the act to encourage horse thief detective associations, which was read the third time, and passed the House by yeas 72, nays 26.
Mr. THORNBURGH called up the bill [S. 280] to establish public libraries which was read the third time, and passed the House by yeas.
Mr. TULLEY called up his bill, [H. R. 148] to legalize and make valid the sale of real estate in certain cases, which was read the third time.
Mr. TULLEY insisted there was no injustice in this bill, and it could take away the rights of no man.
Mr. OSBORNE, of Elkhart, said if there was apiece of real estate sold by the sheriff, and the party from whom the land was taken desires to recover back, through the courts, his land, this Legislature ought not to attempt to step in and interfere in that right. He thought the Legislature could not and would not attempt it.
Mr. MARCH thought the passage of the bill would injure a greater number than it would benefit, and he hoped the bill would not pass.
The bill failed to pass the House by yeas 28, nays 47.
Mr. SKINNER called up Mr. Owens bill [H. R. 225] to amend section 1 of the act to prevent the spread of Canada thistles. Railroad authorities shall cause their section hands to destroy and prevent the spread of Canada thistles along the track and on all railroad lands, which was read the third time and passed the House by--yeas 72, nays 1.
The House took a recess until 2 o'clock.
Mr. VANPELT called up his bill[H. R. 473] o legalize errors and imperfections in the descriptions in articles of association in the organization of turnpike, gravel and macadimized roads, etc., which was read the third time and passed the House by--yeas 65 nays 5.
Mr. Taylor, of Davis, introduced a bill [H. R. 657] to amend the 642d section of the general practice act, which was read the first time and parsed to the second reading.
Mr. VAN VALZAH called up his bill [H. R. 509] to provide for the redemption of real property of foreign corporations after the same has been sold for taxes, which was read the third time and passed the House by yeas 74, nays 2.
Mr. VAWTER called up Mr. Overmeyer's bill [H. R 13] to amend Sec 172 of an act prescribing the manner of impanneling petit jurors, approved March 20, 1852, which was read the third time and passed by yeas 53, nays 30.
Mr. WATSON called up the bill [S. 194] defining who shall be competent witnessess, which was read the third time
Mr. DRAKE was satisfied that some of the provisions of this bill would work injustice to the medical profession. It was not right to require a man who had spent a lifetime to acquire a profession to testify for the same price as witnesses in ordinary cases. He could not vote for the bill.
Mr. MARCH said there were hardships in every class of life, and he did not see where it would work injustice. The physician's knowledge was valuable and so was the farmers. The farmer could be an expert, and he could not see where you could draw the line. If you exempt a physician you must exempt everybody else. He hoped the bill would pass.
Mr. WILLARD would support the latter portion, but the former portion, that which allows husband and wife to testify against each other, he was opposed to. It was a license for perjury, and this was an aggressive crime, and these bills would take away some of the safeguards attempted to be thrown around the prevention of this crime. He was compelled to vote against the bill as it now stood.
Mr. ALLEN of Putnam, should vote for this bill because it allows the wife to go into court and testify against a brutal husband. He was opposed to any distinction before the law as witness between doctors, lawyers, farmers, artists or laborers; and there ought not to be any distinction.
Mr. WATSON said the old law would not allow a party interested in a suit to testify. The theory of the law now is to allow every- one in possession of facts concerning the case, high or low, rich or poor, to testify. The bill then passed the House by yeas 63, nays 19
Mr. OVERMEYER. from the
The report was concurred in, by yeas 70, nays l3.
Mr. WILLARD called up his bill [H. R. 162] providing in cases of assignment, labor performed within 42 months preceding such an assignment shall be paid in full to any amount not exceeding $200, which was read the third time, and parsed the House, by yeas 72, nays 7.
Mr. WIMMER called up his bill [H. R. 373] to amend section 2 of an act in relation to trespassing animals--it repeals the act as to a lawful fence--which was read the third time and passed the House by--yeas 52, nays 25.
Mr. WORKS called up his bill [H. R. 120] concerning evidence to be given by defendant for libel or slander, which was read the third time and passed the House by--yeas 72, nays 7.
The SPEAKER, in his turn, by request, called up the bill [S. 258] to legalize the acts of the board of county commissioners of Allen county, and the acts of the Common Council of Fort Wayne, etc., was read the third time.
Mr. FLEMING, being in too feeble health to address the House, the clerk read from his
pen as follows: At my earnest solicitation the speaker has called up this bill. I am
not in sufficient health to address the House upon the subject. This bill is of the
greatest importance to Fort Wayne, and the citizens are anxiously awaiting its
passage. Some six years ago the City Council of Fort Wayne considered it for the best
interests of the city to annex certain lands lying adjacent to the city. Under the law
it was necessary for a majority of the Council to sign a petition to the county
commissioners that they would permit such annexation. A resolution embracing such
petition was unanimously passed by the Council. A copy of this resolution, properly
certified to by the city clerk, was presented to the commissioners by the city
attorney. Thereupon the commissioners granted. the petition, and the lands became a
part of the city. As is represented to me--and I be-[lieve]
The bill then passed the house by yeas 73, nays 1.
Mr. CONWAY called up his bill [H. R. 202] authorizing cities and towns to exact license for the sale of intoxicating liquors, which was read the third time and passed the House by yeas 61, nays 10.
Mr. BROWN called up his bill [H. R. 281] to enable owners of wetlands to clean out ditches where the same can not be done without in jury to adjoining lands, which, was read the third time and passed, the House by yeas 61, nays 9.
Mr. WATSON offered a resolution, which was adopted, that as n number of bills passed had. not been signed by the governor, and thereby failed to become laws, that a committee of three be appointed to ascertain the number and subject matter of these bills and report the same to this House.
The SPEAKER made the committee to consist of Messrs. Watson, Works and Osborne of Elkhart.
The following described bills were read the second time by title and referred to appropriate committees:
The bill [H. R. 640] to protect the purity of the ballot-box: [H. R. 648] to provide for taxing rolling stock of fast freight companies; [H. R. 650] to amend sections 6 and 635 of the general practice act; [H. R. 651] in relation to pleading and practice; [H. R. 649] regulating foreign insurance companies: [H. R. 652] for the incorporation of towns; [H. R 653] defining the termini of gravel and other toll roads; [H. R. 654] to provide for the release of judgments against bankrupts; [H. R. 655] to amend the general practice act; [H. R. 656] prescribing certain duties of the auditor of state.
On the motion of Mr. OVERMEYER, the last described bill [H. R. 656] was ordered engrossed by yeas 53, nays 26.
Mr. Davidson called up the bill [H. R. 544] for the protection of sheep. The speaker--Mr. Humphreys in the chair--said the provision of the bill is to kill any dog running at large. It was read the third time, and after much levity, throwing of paper wads, pamphlets, books, etc., the bill finally passed the House by--yeas 56, nays 21.
The bill [H. R. 626] to provide for a general system of common schools, and for the care and management of the school funds and revenues, was read the third time--
And then the House adjourned.
The reading of the minutes was dispensed with.
The order of business was suspended, and the following described new Senate bills were introduced, to take the place of similar bills passed both Houses of this General Assembly last session, bat which failed to become laws because they were not presented for the approval of his excellency, the governor, "within two days previous to the final adjournment," as required by a provision in the State constitution. When introduced, these bills were read the first time, and, on motion of the senator presenting them, unless otherwise stated, were severally read the second tune, considered as engrossed, read the third time, and passed the three readings and the final vote in the Senate, under a setting aside or the constitutional restriction intended to prevent hasty legislation, which requires that "every bill shall be read by sections, on three several days in each House," this being done in each case and on each bill by an affirmative vote of not less than two-thirds of ''all the members elected" to the Senate, on a call of the yeas and nays, which are required by the constitution to be taken on all such questions, and entered on the journal of proceedings.
By Mr. RAGAN [S. 445] touching foreign corporations and declaring certain acts thereof shall work forfeiture the same as the bill H. R. 126--which being read the first time--
Mr. DICE explained: This bill was passed at the regular session, but in accordance with a decision of the attorney general, it being among the number of bills not presented for signature of the governor till Monday, has failed to become a law. On his further motion the constitutional rule was dispensed with, the bill read the second and third times and passed the Senate by yeas 43, nays 1.
By Mr. GRUBBS, [S. 446] defining libel and to prevent the publication thereof, (a modification of his bill S. 65) which was pressed to the final vote and passed by yeas 43, nays 2.
By Mr. FOWLER [S. 447] to amend Secs. 1, 2 and 20 of the supervision of highways act of March 5,1877 (the same as his bill S. 187--see description in these reports Feb. 21, p.m.,) which was pressed to the final vote, and passed the Senate by yeas 47, nays 0.
By Mr. MENZIES [S. 448] authorizing the surrender of charters of cities having a population of less than 7,000, whenever two-thirds of the tax payers shall so petition. (Similar to his bill S. 140,) which was passed to the final reading, and passed by yeas 46, nays 0.
By Mr. KAHLO [S. 449] to exempt the wages of laborers from garnishement, etc., (the same as his bill S. 43, passed last session,) which was read the first, second and third times and passed by yeas 38, nays 5.
Mr. REEVE, as friendly to the object of the bill, S. 449, objected attention to a clause therein which is in contravention of a provision in the constitution.
By Mr. VIEHE [S. 450] defining the time for holding general elections and fixing the time at which certain acts connected therewith shall be done (similar to the bill, S. 442--Mr. Reeve's) which was pressed to its final reading and passed the Senate by yeas 45, nays 1.
By Mr. SHAFFER, [S. 451] to legalize the acts of the incorporation of Huntington (similar to his bill S. 23) which was pressed through the thiee readings, and passed by yeas 33, nays 8.
By Mr. PETERSON, [S. 452] to amend section 3 and repeal section 4 of the Lye Creek Drainage association relief act of March 10, 1873 (similar to his bill, S. 365) which was pressed to the final vote and passed by yeas 35, nays 2.
By Mr. DICE [S. 453] in relation to the use of human bodies for the purposes of disection (similar to his bill S. 136) which was pushed through the three readings and passed by yeas 43, nays 0.
By Mr. STREIGHT [S. 454] to reduce the number of superior judges in Marion county to three (similar to his bill S. 270) which was pressed through to the final vote, and passed by yeas 36, nays 0.
On motion by Mr. COMSTOCK, the House amendments to his bill [S. 194 see these reports
Feb. 20, a. m.] in relation to witnesses, were read. He said the House amendments
excepted confidential communications be-[tween]
The amendments were concurred in.
On motion by Mr. BENZ the bill [S. 432--Mr. Fowler's] to admit infants between the ages of 7 and 16 to the House of Refuge, was read the second time and under a dispensation of the constitutional restriction read the third time and passed by yeas 41, nays 0.
On motion by Mr. TRAYLOR, the bill [H. R. 610]
to legalize official acts of Paoli, was read the first time and referred to the
Mr. LANGDON called up his motion entered the other day to amend rule 49 of the Senate by adding thereto, these words: "Nor shall the order of business as established by the rule be changed or suspended except by a vote of at least two-thirds of the members present, provided this rule shall not apply to any appropriation or apportionment bills, or the State House bill.
Then came a recess till 2 o'clock.
On motion of Mr. HARRIS the pending motion to amend the rules was laid on the table by yeas 28, nays 16.
On motion by Mr. FOWLER the Senate agreed to consider the general appropriation bill [H. R. 592], and--
On motion by Mr. VIEHE the vote by which the amendments thereto reported by the
On motion by Mr. FOWLER the vote agreeing to allow $800 for a governor's clerk was also reconsidered.
Mr. VIEHE moved to amend by striking out the committee amendment adding "for governor's clerk, $800," which was agreed to by yeas 33, nays 14.
Mr. HEFRON made an ineffectual motion--yeas 20, nays 24--to reconsider the vote of last Saturday by which the committee amendment to increase the salary of deputy secretary of state from $1,000 to $1,500, was rejected.
Mr. W1LSON moved to amend by striking out the committee amendment increasing the auditor of state's salary from 81,500 to 82,000.
Mr. GRUBBS insisted that no salary can be fixed in an appropriation bill. He admitted 81,500 is not enough as a salary for the auditor of state, but the salary is fixed at 81,500 by a law passed by a Democratic Legislature, and this Legislature has no right to appropriate a single dollar more as a salary for that officer, and every dollar that officer draws for salary above 81,500 would be wrongfully and unlawfully taken. He believed in standing by the law.
Mr. MENZIES referred to the general appropriation bill passed by a Republican House of Representatives two years ago, allowing a salary of $2,500 for the auditor of state. Each Legislature is a law to itself, and if we vote to appropriate $2,500 to an officer of the State, that officer would have a right to it. He did not believe $1,000 was salary enough for the gallant old soldier now in that office, who followed the flag of our country through two wars. It is niggardly to ask a man to bring his family here and take charge of that responsible office for $1,500. It Is not the Intention of the law that an officer shall leave another employment for a meager salary, but it is expected he can return to private life with money accumulated while in office.
Mr. DICE admired the war record of the present auditor of state, but is it right and proper, from that tact alone, to increase his salary in this questionable way, when the law Bays his nominal salary shall be but $1,500? The real salary is $6,000, or more, as the outgoing auditor will say. Mr. D. believed the courts would not allow the auditor to draw more than $1,500 from the State treasury, even if a larger salary be named in this appropriation bill. He deprecated the attempt to drag politics into this question.
Mr. GARRIGUS regarded this as no time to increase fees and salaries. The people are not demanding an increase of salaries. These offices are striven after, with the salaries attached to them, and he objected to any increase. He also objected to lugging in this debate, allusion to the military record of any official for the purpose of influencing members.
Mr. WOOD asked if this is not a political measure why do senators on the other side vote together on this question ?
Mr. WOOD was opposed to reducing the salary of the auditor of state below the amount now fixed by law. The officer is not paid now half as much as the majority of county officers receive for less services. We must pay the State officers a living salary. Unless the State pays its officers a living salary it invites incompetency and dishonesty in the public service. The people want and should have a reduction of salaries where it can be done without consummating a wrong to the officers and the State. The people, we hear so much talked of here are not crazy, but reasonable upon this subject, and we should handle it without partisan bias.
Mr. FOSTER insisted Democrats promised to stand by a reduction of salaries; and there is where he will be found first, last and all the time.
Mr. KRAMER regarded it as the office of the appropriation bill to pay the fees and salaries allowed in the statute.
Mr. HEFRON regretted the direction this discussion has taken. In the consideration of this bill the question of fees and salaries should not be discussed ft the salary of a State officer is too low it is not our fault. Our duty in this bill is to appropriate the money to pay the salary as fixed by law. When the question comes up la proper shape he would vote for an increase in the salary of this officer.
Mr. VIEHE said his sentiments were expressed in the remarks just made: and for the
additional reason there may soon be a bill reported from the
Messrs. OLDS, FOSTER and KRAMER opposed the motion to postpone, which was rejected by yeas 17, nays 26.
The amendment [Mr. Wilson's] was agreed to by yeas 26, nays 21.
Mr. COMSTOCK moved to strike out the committee amendment increasing the auditor's clerks in the land and insurance departments from $1,000 to $1,200 each.
Mr. STREIGHT favored the motion. Good clerks can be had now for $1,000 a year; $1,500 two years ago is no better than 81,000 now.
Mr. WINTERBOTHAM understood it took men peculiarly qualities. to nil these positions. He paid $1,200 a year for a reasonably fair bookkeeper, and did not believe that too much.
Mr. REEVE was pleased to see this Kilkenny cat fight going on He contrasted the
85,000 contingent fund of Governor Ashbel P. Willard with the $155,000 contingent fund
of Governor Oliver P. Morton. If the salary of these State officials were put at $50 a
year there would be plenty of contemptible beggars will-[ing]
Mr. KAHLO moved that debate cease; the motion was agreed to The motion to strike out [Mr. Comstock's] was agreed to by yeas 26, nays 19. The committee amendment allowing $600 for the clerk and deputy of the attorney general was agreed to.
Mr. BURRELL moved to strike out the committee amendment increasing the salary of Superintendent of Public instruction from $2,000 to $2,500.
Messrs. GRUBBS, STREIGHT, TREAT favored this increase in the fee and salary bill first, afterward in this bill; but not otherwise.
Mr. HART considered that $2,000 with. traveling expenses was ample.
The motion [Mr. Burell's] to strike out was rejected by yens 20, nays 25.
Mr. BURRELL advised consistency, and wished to see the senate stick to the law as it is on the statute books. The office of an appropriation bill he conceded to be to provide payment for salaries fixed by law.
The committee amendment increasing the salary of Superintendent of Public Instruction was agreed to by yeas 24, nays 20.
On motion by Mr. COMSTOCK the committee amendment increasing the pay of superintendent's clerk from $1,500 to 1,800 was rejected.
On motion by Mr. BURRELL the committee amendment increasing the salary of the law librarian from $1,000 to $1,200 was rejected.
And then the Senate adjourned.
The reading of the minutes was dispensed with.
The SPEAKER announced the first thing in order was a vote on the passage of the bill [H. R. 620] to provide for a general system of common schools.
Mr. OVERMEYER said while this is a codification of the school law, this Legislature would be responsible for the passage of the act, and he desired unanimous consent to amend so as to reduce the levy for a special school tax to 20 cents instead of 50 cents on the $100, and to reduce the poll tax from $1 to 50 cents.
Mr. BAKER thought the reduction proposed was too low. He would favor a levy of 30 or 35 cents.
Mr. WATSON was also in favor of a reduction.
Mr. REED: Where there are debts for school houses, the trustees should be allowed to levy a tax that would enable the debt to be paid. He thought it would be unwise to limit the levy to 20 cents--it was too low.
Mr. STUCKER would like to vote for this bill, but could not do so unless the amendments were adopted.
Mr. CONNER was glad the bill was in the shape it was, because, if this bill is defeated, the law would stand as it is now, and he should object to the amendments.
Mr. STEVENS said in his part of the State they could not get along with less than a levy of 40 cents on the $100.
Mr. OVERMEYER moved to recommit the bill and amendments.
Mr. MIERS said this bill does not change a word in the law as it now is. It simply puts the different acts together, and if the House undertook to amend this he was fearful of destroying the object of the codification. He thought the bill ought to pass just as it is. He hoped the motion to recommit would not be insisted upon.
Mr. MARCH thought the best way would be to recommit this bill. While he was in favor of lowering the tax, yet in many places where fine school houses are commenced they will need the tax as it now stands.
Mr. SLEETH thought if this bill becomes a law to day, and to-morrow some other bill passes that amends the school law in some particular section, that law could not be found, as it would be smothered up in this bill.
Mr. ALLEN, of Putnam, was in favor of recommitting the bill to a select committee.
Mr. WATSON wanted to mature the bill before it should be passed.
Mr. TULLEY said it was well understood that the school law was now badly scattered, and he was afraid that if these amendments were considered we would be unable to agree, and this codification would be destroyed. He hoped the bill would pass as it is, and was opposed to recommitting the bill.
Mr. BAKER was in favor of the bill as it is, and thought it, ought not to be recommitted.
The bill was then recommitted to a select committee of five.
Subsequently the SPEAKER made that committee to consist of Messrs. Overmeyer, March. Baker, Humpreys and Miers.
Mr. DAVIDSON, from the
Mr. OWEN moved that the bill be indefinitely postponed, which was agreed to.
On the motion of Mr. WORKS the House took up the report of the committee on the investigation of the office of auditor of state.
The majority report was submitted and read recommending the adoption of the following resolution: That the attorney general be instructed to commence an action for the recovery of all the moneys that may have been received by Mr. E. Henderson, while auditor of state, that may in the opinion of the attorney general be entitled, and to prosecute such action to final judgment, if possible, in such manner as to obtain a judicial construction of the statutes relative to the proportion or amount of moneys received from insurance companies to which the State is entitled.
The minority of the committee submitted a lengthy report recommending the adoption of the following resolution:
Resolved, That the attorney general be instructed to ascertain what amount of
fees have been collected by the said Henderson and not paid into the treasury, and
upon failure of said Henderson to pay said amount into the
Then came the recess till 2 o'clock.
The House concurred in the amendment of the Senate to the House amendments to the bill [S. 125] for the punishment of persons in possession of stolen property, by inserting: in the second section after the word "stolen" in the fifth line the words "in any other State and been brought into this State."
The unfinished business at the adjournment for dinner--viz., the consideration of the majority and minority reports of the committee appointed to investigate the office of auditor of state--was resumed.
Mr. WORKS said this was an important question to the State and to Mr Henderson. The amount in controversy is something over $13,000. The minority report shows there has been collected, extra fees under the act of 1877, over $8,000 in one year and over $16,000 since the law took effect. The question is whether Mr. Henderson should account for 75 per cent. of these fees to the State. The minority report concludes that he is bound to account for this amount. The majority holds that he is not indebted to the State for the fees, but recommends that he be sued for the amount,. This seems to be inconsistent, and if Mr. Henderson owes the State nothing this House would do him an injustice to order that such suit be brought. He called the attention of the House to the amount that has been paid to this office for salary, deputy and clerks and office expenses, and insurance fees, $22,644. This being true we should not pay him more than the statute allows him. As to the law, the minority of the committee are supported in their position by Attorney Generals Woollen and Buskirk, and Mr. Henderson himself, who issued a circular to the companies, in which he claimed the right to collect these extra fees, and that he had no discretion in the matter because the law was one to raise revenue for the State. In addition to the fees charged Mr. Henderson has used postage stamps amounting to about $600, furnished by the State, to send out the certificates of the agents of the companies,and instead of accounting to the State for the money collected has converted the same to his own use. It can hardly be claimed that any construction of the statute would allow him this money, and all of the committee agree that he should pay it over to the State. An effort is being made by parties interested in this matter to have both of these reports laid on the. table, thereby smothering the whole matter. This would be wrong. This question should be fairly met and one or the other of these reports adopted.
Mr. SAINT said he voted for the resolution to investigate the accounts of the auditor of state. We have the reports from the committee and they do not agree, but recommend that a suit be brought by the attorney general in order to settle a disputed question. In view of the fact that the committee can not agree this House should lay both reports upon the table and adopt the resolution recommended in the report of the majority, and therefore he moved to lay the majority and minority reports upon the table, and that the resolution of the majority be adopted.
The motion was ruled out of order,
Mr. SLEETH said this investigation committee was raised by an almost unanimous vote, but on the very next day a resolution was introduced for a reconsideration, and with a view to refer the whole matter to the attorney general. A fair and. thorough investigation was proceeded with, as both the voluminous and exhaustive reports will show. The majority of the committee had taken the pains to furnish the opinion of the attorney general and also the opinion of Mr. Henderson, all of which fully decides that these fees are properly collected as a part of the revenue of the State, and 75 per cent. of them must be now due to the State. He wanted to know what the majority of this House meant after this thorough investigation, developing the facts that there is $13,000 due the State, by making a motion to lay both reports on the table. There was not an ungentlemanly word or insinuation in either report against the ex- auditor, He thought perhaps thy committee had done their work too welt to suit the majority. If the House desired to treat the minority of the committee with contempt, let it move to lay the report under the table rather than on the table.
Mr. WILLARD moved to lay both reports upon the table.
Mr. SLEETH demanded a division of the question.
The first question being on the motion to lay the minority report on the table, it was rejected by yeas 29, nays 53.
The majority report was laid on the table by yeas 55, nays 29.
Mr. MIERS said the only difference between these two reports is the construction of a statute. The minority and majority agree that Mr. Henderson never at any time disguised or attempted in any way to conceal the fact, that he charged and retained all of said fees, claiming that he was entitled to do so by a fair construction of said statute, and that Mr. Henderson. upon request, furnished the committee with all of the facts desired. The majority and minority of the committee agree that construction of the statute is difficult, and the majority of the committee say that they have come to the conclusion that a fair construction of the statute would give the auditor all of said fees, while the minority say that with considerable difficulty they have come to the conclusion that the auditor should pay into the treasury 75 per cent. thereof. There being therefore nothing that reflects on Mr. Henderson's integrity as a man, or as a just and upright officer, but simply a question of law, he was sorry that the matter of adopting or rejecting either the majority or minority report had been forced upon the House. He thought the House ought to be very slow to adopt reports or resolutions like the one under consideration, lest a very great injustice might be done by placing one of the citizens of the State in the light of having done a dishonest act, when they only meant to give their judgment as to a proper construction of a statute. He therefore thought it would have been much wiser to have instructed the attorney general to bring suit for the recovery of the money in controversy. Then there might have been a determination of the legal question, the only one in controversy, without doing violence to any citizen. Under the operation of the previous question, the minority report was adopted by yeas 58, nays 30.
Mr. WILLARD offer a concurrent resolution that this General Assembly will adjourn sine die on Monday, March 24,1879.
Mr. SHANKS moved to amend, by adding "if we are ready to do so."
Mr. SLEETH offered a substitute that thia General Assembly, before taking up matters of general legislation, proceed at once to perfect and pass the general and specific appropriation bill and the state House bill, and no other business shall be taken up until they are finally disposed of, and that, upon their passage, we immediately adjourn sine die.
On motion of Mr. LEHMAN the original resolution and the substitute were laid on the table by yeas 43, nays 37.
The following numbered Senate bills were read the first time, and passed to the second reading:
Senate bills 59, 62, 79, 83. 414, 445, 448, 448, 449, 450, 451, 452,see Senate reports of this morning.
The following numbered bills were read the first time and passed to the second reading: H. R. 660, 661, 662, 663,664, 665. 666 and 667.
On the motion of Mr. OVERMYER the constitutional rule was suspended so that the bill [H. R. 660] may be read the first, and second time by title, considered, engrossed, read a third time by sections and put upon its passage, and that the same roll call apply to each bill from 660 to 667 inclusive, which was agreed to by yeas 81, nays 2.
The bills were then read the second and third times and severally passed the House, from 660 to 667 inclusive.
On the motion of Mr. HUMPHREYS, the constitutional rule was suspended--yeas 77, nays 0--in order that Senate bills 441 to 451, inclusive (see Senate reports of this morning), may be read the second and third times, and put upon their passage, and these bills were severally passed, the one vote serving to suspend the rule for all the bills.
And then the House adjourned.
The minutes of yesterday were not read.
On motion by Mr. COMSTOCK the Senate proceeded with the unfinished business of yesterday, viz.: the consideration of the amendments proposed by the Senate committee on finance to the general appropriation bill [H. R. 592].
The amendment increasing the pay of the sheriff of the supreme court from $200 to $500 was agreed to by yeas 36, nays 6.
The amendment proposing to strike out the appropriation for the State geologist of $1,000 was agreed to.
The amendment proposing to increase the pay of commissioners of the Insane Hospital, as fixed in the original bill, from $300 to $600 was agreed to by yeas 23, nays 21.
The amendments proposing to increase the pay of superintendent of the Insane Hospital and the Blind Asylum and Deaf and Dumb were severally rejected.
The amendment proposing to increase the pay or trustees of the Blind Asylum from $300 to $400 was agreed to by yeas 39. nays 7.
The amendment increasing the appropriation to the State prison south from $70,000 to $75,000 was agreed to by yeas 36, nays 10.
Mr. WINTERBOTHAM stated reasons for this increase: The amount named is the lowest possible limit. The directors of the prisons should not be encouraged to incur indebtedness, etc., etc.
The amendment increasing the appropriation for the House of Refuge for Boys, from $40,000 to $45,000 was rejected by yeas 21, nays 26.
Mr. RAGAN understood there was a saving on the last appropriation for the House of Refuge of some $10,000, which was covered back in the State treasury, but he favored this amendment because it is only $1,000 more than was used by that institution.
Messrs. WINTERBOTHAM and FOWLER were satisfied this amendment should, be adopted. This institution is growing probably as rapidly as any other of the State's wards.
Mr. STREIGHT opposed this increase to the House of Refuge.
The amendment for increasing the sum for the Women and Girls Reformatory from $21,500 to 24,506 was rejected by yeas 21, nays 26.
Mr. SHIRK favoring this item.
Mr. FOWLER, seated the institution was in debt some $1,300 now.
Mr. GARRIGUS was opposed to squandering the public money, and while willing to vote for necessary supplies did not believe this increase to the Reformatory advisable.
On motion by Mr. HARRIS, the $3,000 for the Normal school was reduced to $2,000.
Mr. DICE moved to strike out the committee amendment adding $2,000 to the $2,000 appropriated in the bill for the Purdue University being read.
Mr. MENZIES brought up the question as to whether the connection of the State with these educational institutions should not be severed. If the State has a right under the constitution to appropriate money to these institutions let it be done generously and not doled out in this pitiful way our form of Government knows no class and why should it take money from the people by the enforcement of taxation and appropriate it to the support of a school for any particular caste for the diffusion of technology and scientific agriculture anymore than for any other particular avocation or profession. The question is; Have we a right, under the organic laws of the State, to give a dollar to such an Institution? These precedents are being established at almost every General Assembly and there will be no end to this thing. Try this institution on its endowment fund of $15,000 per annum and see if that will not sustain it.
Mr. REEVE read article 8 of the State constitution, thinking that clause should remove all doubt, but that the trainers of that organic law had in their minds just such schools as the Purdue University, the State Normal and the University of Bloomington. He spoke at length in favor of bestowing upon these institutions the fostering care of the State.
Mr. DICK believed the people were fostering too many educational institutions. In 1873
Mr. TRUSLER: As Purdue University is the only State institution which makes any profession to work in the interest of agriculture, he felt it a duty to stand by Purdue. He saw no good reason in retrograding or going backward', and if we wipe out Purdue it will be only a question of time when there will be no farmers occupying seats on this floor where there are now 31 lawyers, and comparatively few representatives of the agricultural community. He wanted to see the agricultural Interests better cultivated but so long as you listen to the sirew songs of these professional lawyers, so long the agricultural community must occupy the background it is the agricultural interest that pays the most taxes, and it is for the interest of the State to stand by Purdue University. He desired to see the farmer elevated. The wealth or this country has to start from the soil, and why now stop the only institution that represents the oldest art known to man? Commerce and manufacture might be stricken down, but educated agriculture can reproduce them all. Agriculture is the fountain of all political power--the guardian of liberty--and if the fountain is impure the stream must be foul. Elevate the farmer--give him hope for elevation and reward--and it will be found to add to the interest of the State and the entire country.
Mr. BRISCOE had a much higher opinion of agricultural interests than many others, regarding it as the first in the land But that interest is not regarded in Purdue University, for its principal agricultural officer does not exist. The Board has abolished the superintendent of the agricultural department--that official is wiped out. A person to learn any branch of industry must have a competent tutor, and there is no tutor now in Purdue for the farmer boys. Ninety-three thousand dollars has been appropriated in the last six years to that institution, and now why is the paltry sum of $2,000 asked for? How much good will that do the great farming interest of the State?
Mr. KENT: Experience has shown the common school system elevates the lower level, but is it not necessary for a farmer to understand chemistry. Intelligence and brains always go to the front, and as there is not one common school tea-her in 50 that can teach chemistry, should the farmer boy not be permitted to go to some school where he can learn the higher knowledge that will enable him to pursue the occupation of farming in an intelligent way.
Mr. STREIGHT could see but two questions involved in this discussions: First, the duty of the State, and next, the propriety of making the appropriations for such objects. The State should not undertake to do for the few what she can not do for the many. But for the reason that with one other appropriation it is expected this institution will be self-sustaining, he should vote for the sum asked for now, while not committing himself to the principle of keeping up the higher branches of education in this State. Then came the recess till 2 o'clock.
Mr. HEFRON was aware, in opposing this appropriation, he was antagonizing very respectable classes; but this university is sailing under the nag of an agricultural college, while, upon close examination, but little agriculture will be found in it. Only five students are engaged in that particular study. The landholder knows that this institution is there, that taxes are paid for its support, and that is about all the farmers of Indian a know about it. If this institution was of sufficient practicable benefit to the farmers of this State, he would not oppose an appropriation of $25,000 if necessary.
Mr. KRAMER held it expedient and right for the State to help support these institutions designed to educate farmers, lawyers and teachers. An agricultural school is needed in this State, because farming should be made attractive and remunerative. This college bids fair, in the near future, to become a self-sustaining institution, and he did not thinly the people would complain if this small pittance is appropriated.
Mr. HART referred to the fact that men are quitting the business of farming, and lawyers and doctors are becoming thicker with every passing year; consequently it is the duty of the State to encourage institutions devoted to the advancement of agricultural interests, and to encourage everything that will tend to elevate the farming community, and thus in the speediest manner possible put this country upon a prosperous footing again.
Mr. LANGDON declared mat so much had been said, and so well said, but little was left for him to say in favor of making appropriations to Purdue University. He went on to show that the State of Indiana is under moral as well as legal obligation to maintain this institution and give to it moral and pecuniary support. Though having no oppportunity, while still in its infancy, to make any great showing, yet if the increase already indicated, goes on, it will outstrip, within a few years, the oldest institutions in the land.
The motion [Mr. Dice's] to strike out the committee amendment was rejected by yeas 9, nays ; 8; and the amendment was agreed to by yeas 3, nays 11.
The committee amendment increasing the appropriation for public printing and stationery from $8,000 to $12,000 for the fiscal year ending November 1,1880, was adopted by yeas 20, nays 16; and the item increasing the appropriation for the same purpose for the fiscal year ending November 1881, from $20,000 to $24,000 (a legislative year) was also adopted.
On motion by Mr. HARRIS the report of the committee as a whole was adopt ed by yeas 31,. nays 15.
Mr. REEVE moved to amend the bill so the provisions of any law now in force shall not conflict herewith.
Mr. GRUBBS opposed putting anything into the bill that would look like changing the fee and salary bill, for it is not the purpose and can not be the effect of an appropriation bill to fix the salaries of any officer whatever.
Mr. VIEHE also opposed the amendment for substantially the same reasons. The amendment was rejected by yeas 5, nays 31.
Mr. VIEHE moved to increase the amount for chamber and office expenses of the supreme court from $1,000 to $2,000.
On motion by Mr. STRElGHT--yeas 24 nays 20--the amendment was amended by making the appropriation $1,500.
Mr. VIEHE moved to add an item for a Janitor for the Supreme court $700.
On motion by Mr. STRElGHT--yeas 22, nay 21--the amendment was amended by reducing the pay to $500.
Mr. BURRELL moved to strike out the appropriation of $1,000 for traveling expenses of the superintendent of public instruction.
Mr COMSTOCK moved, ineffectually, to amend the amendment by making the sum $500.
Mr. VIEHE moved to make the amount $600, which was agreed to by yeas 33, nays 16.
Mr. STREIGHT moved to reduce the pay of the adjutant general from $1,200 to $500.
Mr. WINTERBOTHAM moved to make the pay $800, pending which
The Senate adjourned.
The reading of the journal was dispensed with.
The bill [S. 452] for the relief of the Lye Creek Draining association was read the third time and passed the House by yeas 71, nays 1.
The bill. [S. 453] in relation to the use of human bodies for the purpose of dissection and repealing the thirty-eighth section of the act. defining misdemeanors, approved January 14, 1852, [similar to the bill S. 136, which passed both houses last session] was read the third time and passed the House by yeas 61,nays 11.
The bill [S. 451] to amend the first and thirteenth sections of an act to establish superior courts, defining their jurisdiction and providing for their election, and compensation of judges thereof, approved February 15, 1871,and supplemental thereto, approved March. 5, 1857, and reviving said amended section [similar to the bill S. 270, to reduce the number of superior judges in Marion county to three] was read the third time and passed the House by yeas 79, nays 2.
A message from the governor was received transmitting the bills H. R. 231, 126, 195, 14, 15, 55 and 122, and stated that he objected to these bills becoming laws, because they were presented to him after the close of the late regular session of the General Assembly, and not prior to the two days previous to the final adjournment.
Mr. ARNOLD, of Wabash, moved to reconsider the vote by which the bill [H. R. 392] the military bill was defeated.
On the motion of Mr. WATSON, the motion to reconsider was laid on the table by yeas 42, nays 30.
Mr. SCHWEITZER offered the following resolution, which was adopted by consent:
Whereas, The committee appointed to investigate the auditor's office during the term of office of E. Henderson have made their report; and,
Whereas, Said committee was also instructed to investigate the affairs of said office for the tour years prior to his term of office, and no report has been made thereon; therefore,
Resolved, That said committee be instructed to complete said investigation and report to this House.
Mr. SCHWEITZER insisted that Mr. Wild- man's term should be investigated as well as that of Mr. Henderson's. If there is any fraud, we want to find it out.
Mr. BRIGGS thought if the members of the minority desired to do what was right they should have proceeded to the investigation of the office during Mr. Wildman's term.
Mr. OVERMEYER, as a member of that committee, was willing to proceed with any investigation that was necessary and right.
Mr. TULLEY thought the four years prior to Mr. Henderson's term should be investigated.
Mr. COMPTON offered a concurrent resolution that this special session adjourn sine die on Saturday, March 22, 1879 at 10 o'clock a. m.
On motion of Mr. ARNOLD, of Blackford, the resolution was laid on the table by yeas 44, nays 40.
Mr. 0VERMEYER introduced a bill [H. R. 668] to establish a board of pardons, which was read the first time and passed to the second reading. The following described bills were read the second time and referred to appropriate committees:
Mr. Taylor of Daviess bill [H. R. 657] to amend the practice act. Also Mr. Herod's bill [H. R. 658] to amend an act authorizing insurance companies to reinsure their risks, and close business. Also Mr. Conner's bill [H. R. 859] for the protection of the consumers of milk.
Mr. HEROD, from the
On the motion of Mr. ENGLISH, the bill was laid on the table. He moved further to reconsider the vote just taken, and to lay that motion on the table. The latter motion was agreed to.
The bill, [S. 83] providing for the election of justices of the peace; also, the bill, [S. 79] to secure more efficient work and material in performances of contracts for public works, etc.; also, the bill, [S. 62] to secure dues from private corporations; also, the bill, [S. 59] to amend the act for the incorporation of towns etc., were read the second time and referred to appropriate committees.
On the motion of Mr. HEROD the bill, [S.21] to establish city courts in cities having a population of 6,000 inhabitants, was taken from the table and placed upon the files.
Mr. ALDEN called up Mr. Schweitzer's bill, [H. R. 115] to amend the act for the observance of the Sabbath.
Mr. SCHWEITZER said it only changes the present law so as to allow barbers to shave their customers on Sunday.
The bill finally passed the House by yeas 52, nays 27.
Mr. ALLEN of Putnam, called up his bill; [H. R. 638] legalising the proceedings of the board of State House commissioners, which was read the third time.
Mr. SHANKS did not think we ought to tie down the plans for the erection of the new State House, so as to prevent a change when the fact might be developed that a change was necessary.
Mr. CONNER could not vote for this bill because the question of the insufficiency of the bonds had been mooted, and the Legislature ought not to act hasty in the matter of legalizing the acts of those commissioners.
Mr. VANPELT said this was one of the bills that he hoped would pass, because when you begin to change the plans you enlarge the ex-expense, and instead of $2,000,000 the State House may cost $4,000,000.
Mr. HESS hoped this bill would not pass. We ought not to say that the bond is sufficient when we know nothing about it.
Mr. LEHMAN thought this bill only legalized what had been done by the State House commissioners, and would prevent law suits. He did not see any good reason why this bill should not pass.
Mr. ALLEN, of Putnum: It was for the interest of the State and the only opposition he had heard come from contractors.
Mr. CONNER moved ineffectually to recommit; with instructions to strike out the legalizing section. The bill then failed to pass the House for want of a constitutional majority by yeas 48, nays 33.
Mr. ARNOLD of Blackford's name being
Mr. TULLY thought the Legislature could not pass a law interfering with private contracts. He had understood that many citizens of Grant county were protesting against the passage of this bill, and he hoped the bill would not pass.
The bill failed to pass for want of a constitutional majority by yeas 49. nays 34.
Mr. ARNOLD, of Wabash, called up his bill [H. R. 442] to amend the common school law so that when a person has been transferred for education, purposes to a township, town, or city in an adjoining county, the trustee of the township from which such transfer has been made shall pay to the trustee of the township to which such transfer has been made, immediately after the receipt of the school revenues from the county treasurer, was read the third time and passed by yeas 56, nays 25.
Mr. BAKER called up Mr. Huthsteiner's bill [H. R. 428] prescribing the duties of county boards--two commissioners can do business. The county shall be divided into three districts, as near equal as possible commissioners to be elected by the resident voters of each district, which was read the third time.
The SPEAKER (Mr. Osborne, of Elkhart, in the chair) said the bill simply changes the law by allowing the commissioners to be elected by the voters of the district they represent only.
Mr. DAILEY could not see any good that would come from the passage of this bill, and as it would increase expenses he did not think the bill ought to pass,
Mr. BRIGGS thought there were several objections, in that there could not be a fair division of the counties where the townships were of a number not divisible by 3.
Mr. ENGLISH said it would work an injustice to Marion county.
Mr. CALDWELL could not see any advantage in the change, and thought it would make rouble, and therefore was opposed to its passage.
The bill failed to pass by yeas 14, nays 69.
Mr. BARKER ca11ed up the bill [S. 325] granting the towns of Evansville, a city charter, which was read the third time and passed by the House by yeas 74, nays 5.
The House then took a recess till 2 o'clock.
Mr. BEARSS introduced a bill [H. R. 669] to amend sections 19 and 20 of an act for the opening, vacation, and changing of highways, which was read the first time and passed to the second reading.
Mr. 0VERMEYER, from the select committee thereon, returned the common school codification bill [H. R. 630] with amendments, and when so amended recommended its passage.
Mr. SLEETH thought the bill as it come from the committtee was nearly perfect, and if it could be as much more improved by another recommitment he would move to recommit it again. He fully approved of it now and he hoped it would pass.
Mr. CUNNINGHAM thought the teachers should not be required to spend two or three days in attending institutes, without paying them for it,; nor should there be a day's work deducted therefrom because they do not attend. He thought the trustees,of the several townships of the county were better qualified to elect the county superitendents than were the county commissioners. He was opposed to the report.
Mr. EDWINS said: Without the pay of the examiner is placed at $3 per day, and no more, he would oppose concurring in the report, but should vote for the final passage of the bill.
The report of the committee was concurred in, the amendments were considered engrossed, and the bill finally passed the House by yeas 70, nays 12
Mr. BLOCKLEY called up the bill [S. 176] to legalize the official acts of the board of trustees of the town of Jasper, Dubois county, which was read the third time and finally passed the House by yeas 59, nays 13.
Mr. OSBORNE, of Elkhart, introduced a joint resolution that the secretary of state is hereby authorized to print in cheap pamphlet form 2,000 copies of the act concerning interest and usury, approved March 10, 1879, and cause to be distributed in each county'20 copies by sending them to the county clerk without delay, the clerks of the circuit courts to immediately receipt for such copies; and as soon as the act is circulated the governor shall issue his proclamation, stating the date thereof, and after such date said act shall be in full force and effect, which was adopted--yeas 75, nays 4.
Mr. BRIGGS called up his bill [H. R. 540] to amend section 18 of an act to provide for the opening and vacating of highways, which was read the third time and passed the House by yeas 73, nays 8.
Mr. BROWN, of Jasper; called up his bill [H. R. 414] for the relief of Patrick Hallegan, which was read the third time and finally passed the House by yeas 73, nays 2.
Mr BROWN, of Steuben, introduced a bill [H. R. 670] to legalize the official acts of the board of Trustees of the town of Angola, which was read the first time, and passed to the second reading.
Mr. OVERMEYER called up the bill [H. R. 368] for the relief of the sureties of Joseph D. Beasley, which failed this morning for want of a constitutional majority. It was again put upon its passage, and finally passed the House by yeas 64, nays 9.
Mr. BRYANT called up the bill [S. 381] for official printing in newspapers, which was read the third time.
On the motion of Mr. ARNOLD, of Wabash, the bill was laid on the table.
Mr. CALDWELL called up his bill [H. R. 154] to allow owners of wet lands to drain the same, which was read the third time and finally passed the House by yeas 69, nays 5.
Mr. CALDWELL introduced a bill [H. R. 671] to appropriate $15,000 for the expenses of this special session of the General Assembly;, which was read the first time and passed to the second reading.
Mr. CUNNINGHAM offered a resolution that when this House adjourn, it adjourn until 2:30 o'clock p.m. on Monday. The resolution was rejected by yeas 29, nays 49.
Mr. CAREY called up Mr. Overmeyer's bill [H. R. 656] the auditor of state shall pay into the State treasury 75 per cent of all fees by him collected under the provision of the third section of the act of March 3, 1877, and all other lees whatever collected by him on account of services rendered in the insurance department and in the land department in his office, and said auditor shall be entitled to retain for his services in collecting such fees the sum of 25 per cent thereon, which was read the third time and passed the House by yeas 71, nays 0.
Mr. REED moved, ineffectually--yeas 34, nays 42--that when this House adjourn, it adjourn until 10 o'clock a. m. on Monday.
On motion of Mr. OWEN, the resolution of Mr. Osborne, of Elkhart, to amend the rules so as to prevent any member from making a speech explaining his vote during roll-call, was taken up and failed to pass the House by--yeas 35 nays 36. The House then adjourned.
The secretary's minutes of yesterday's proceedings were not read. Mr. FOWLER offered a concurrent resolution that this session of the General Assembly adjourn sine die on Tuesday the 25th inst.
Mr. MENZIES moved to amend by substituting next Saturday.
On motion by Mr. REEVE--yeas 23, nays 22--the resolution and amendment were indefinitely postponed.
Mr. REEVE introduced a bill (S. 455] to provide for insuring property belonging to the State of Indiana, which was read the first time. He made an ineffectual motion for a dispensation of the constitutional restriction that, the bill might be pressed to the final vote on its passage.
On motion by Mr HARRIS, the Senate resumed the consideration of the general appropriation bill.
Mr. STREIGHT moved to amend the bill by reducing the pay of the adjutant general from $1,250 to $500.
Mr. COMSTOCK moved to amend the amendment by making the pay $800, which was accepted by Mr. Streight, but rejected by the Senate--yeas 18, nays 21.
On motion by Mr. WINTERBOTHAM, the the appropriation to the prison North was increased from $70,000 to $75,000, by yeas 32, nays 6.
Mr. LEEPER moved to add a night watchman for the Library rooms at a salary of $590, which was agreed to by yeas 30, nays 10.
Mr. STREIGHT moved, ineffectually--yeas 9, nays 29--to reduce the pay of adjutant general from $1,250 to $700.
Mr. MENZIES moved to adopt the bill, as amended, as a whole, and on that motion demanded the previous question, which was seconded by yeas 28, nays 9, and under its operations the motion was agreed to and the Senate amendments to the bill were ordered engrossed for the third reading.
Leaves of absence were severally asked and obtained for seven or eight senators, whereupon--
Mr. LEEPER offered a resolution that when the Senate adjourn it be till Monday.
Mr. HARRIS, without wishing to reflect on members, deprecated the granting of leaves of absences, opposed the resolution, and urged dispatch of business in order that the session may speedily be brought to a close.
Mr. MENZIES thought it hardly generous for the senator who has the privilege of going home from this chamber to his household and family at all hours of the day, and who has never been removed from his house one night this year, to reflect upon others who can not enjoy those privileges. It being evident, since last night when senators commenced going away, and this morning while others are making preparations to go, that there would be nothing done Monday morning, he had accepted an invitation to visit with a gentleman outside of Indianapolis over Sunday, bat he would not stand in the way of finishing the work of this session, and so withdrew his request for leave of absence. Several other senators who were granted the same also withdrew their leaves of absence.
Mr. LEEPER asked and obtained leave to withdraw his resolution, saying that he offer- ed it. because so many leaves of absence were being granted it was evident the Senate would be left without a quorum this after- noon,
On motion by Mr. KENT the Senate agreed to proceed to the consideration of House bills now on the files of the Senate, which passed both Houses last session, but failed to become laws because not presented to the governor for his signature within the time prescribed by the constitution.
The bill [H. R. 661] to legalize certain acts of commissioners of Clinton county in the purchase of a certain tract of land at sheriff's sale (similar to the bill H. R. 55), was read the first time.
On motion by Mr. Kent the constitutional restriction was dispensed with--yeas 40, nays 1--the bill read the second and third times, and passed the Senate by yeas 39, nays 2.
The bill [H. R. 662] to legalize the
incorporation of Auburn, DeKalb county, and annexa-[tions]
On motion by Mr. MERCER, the constitutional rule being suspended for that purpose--yeas 38, nays 1--the bill was read the second time by title only, the third time by sections, and passed the Senate by yeas 37, nays 1.
The bill [H. R. 664] for 'the relief of the estate of John T. Bishop, deceased, and other sureties on the official bond of a defaulting township trustee of Cass county (similar to a bill passed last session by both Houses) was read the first time.
On motion by Mr. REEVE the constitutional rule was suspended--yeas 35, nays 1--and the bill read the second time by title only, the third time by sections, and passed by yeas 34, nays 7. He said the bill should have been drawn so as to permit the County Commissioners to settle these accounts, but since the decease of the principal the only other recourse is by way of this bill; no money relief being involved, it is right, and should be passed.
The bill [H. R. 663] to amend the charter of Evansville so as to admit of a change to the name of Lamasco (similar to a bill which passed both Houses last session), was read for the first reading.
On motion by Mr. FOWLER. the constitional rule was dispensed with--yeas 39, nays 1--and the bill was read by title only for the second time.
Mr. FOWLER moved to amend by reducing the time for publication of notice to voters from "30 to "six" days.
The amendment was agreed to.
On motion by Mr. FOWLER, the constitutional rule was suspended--yeas 38, nays 1--the bill read the third time, and passed by yeas 37, nays 1.
Then came the recess till 2 o'clock.
The bill [H. R. 660] to legalize an election held. In Edinburgh, Johnson county, was read the first time.
Mr. TARLTON said this was a bill which passed both Houses at the last session, but failed to become a law because not presented to the governor in time; he therefore moved that the constitutional rules be suspended in order that the bill may be read the second and third times now and put upon its passage.
The motion was agreed to by--yeas 35, nays 0. The bill was read the second time, by title only, the third time by sections, and passed by yeas 37, nays 1.
The bill [H. R. 665] for the relief of John R. Robinson, a former trustee of a township in Montgomery county, (similar to the bill H. R. 578) was read the first time.
Mr. PETERSON said this is another of those bills passed both Houses last session, but which failed to receive the governor's signature. He moved that the constitutional rule be suspended in order that the bill may be read the second and third times now.
The motion was agreed to by yeas--34, nays 3. The bill read by title only for the second reading, the third time by sections, and passed by yeas 32, nays 3.
The bill [H. R. 667] supplemental to the act allowing cities and towns to issue bonds to pay indebtedness incurred for school purposes, (similar to bill [H. R. 122] which passed both Houses last session) was read the first time.
On motion by Mr. SARNIGHAUSEN the constitutional restriction was dispensed with--yeas 39, nays 0. The bill read the second time by title only, the third time by sections, and passed by yeas 38, nays 2.
The bill [H. R. 666] to amend section 1 of the private cemetery incorporation act of March. 9, 1875, (similar to a bill passed both Houses last session), was read the first time.
On motion by Mr. HARRIS the constitutional rule was dispensed with--yeas 37, nays 1. The bill read the second time by title only, the third time by sections, and passed the Senate by--yeas 39, nays 0.
The House concurrent resolution for paying expenses of witnesses, etc., in the matter of the State House Investigating Committee, amounting to $515.64, with a favorable report from the Finance Committee, was read.
Mr. STREIGHT moved to strike out the names of the parties who instigated this prosecution.
Mr. WINTERBOTHAM understood this investigation was instigated by the House of Representatives.
Mr. TAYLOR: This being a matter brought about, by the House of Representatives, he opposed any change in the resolution. He would vote against any cutting down by one House of any expense incurred by the other.
Mr. REEVE opposed the resolution. While believing it to be the duty of this branch to concur with the other in all legitimate business of legislation, no expense should be incurred in following up street rumors, for that is beneath the dignity of a deliberative body.
Mr. TAYLOR thought the fact that the State House Commissioners came out of the investigation fully sustained, was worth ten times more money than it has cost. The people will have more confidence in the future acts of these gentlemen than they would otherwise have had.
Mr. STREIGHT insisted there never was any reasonable cause for this investigation.
Mr. MENZIES thought the adoption of the amendment would be making a very bad precedent. The amendment was rejected, and the resolution was adopted.
The House concurrent resolution allowing expenses of the House committee when visiting the State Prison South was adopted.
The House concurrent resolution appropriating $69.65 for incidental expenses of the House of Representatives was adopted.
The House concurrent resolution for the renting of a committee room at the Occidental Hotel, and allowing $1 a day for the doorkeeper thereof, was read.
Mr. FOSTER moved so strike out all that refers to renting a room.
On motion by Mr. TAYLOR the resolution was laid on the table. The joint resolution [H. R. 35] for the publication of the new interest law--2,000 copies to be distributed in each county then the governor to proclaim the act in full force and effect, was read.
On motion of Mr. LANGDON it was laid on the table.
On motion by Mr. TRAYLOR the bill [H. R. 610] to legalize elections in and all the official acts of the trustees of the town of Paoli, Orange county, was read the second time. On his further motion the constitutional rule was dispensed with--yeas 34, nays 0--the bill read the third time and passed by--yeas 34, nays 1.
On motion by Mr. FOSTER the Senate proceeded to the consideration of Senate bills on the second reading.
The bill [S. 53--Mr. Woollen's] to amend section 94 of the property assessment act of December 21, 1872, was read the second time.
Mr. HARRIS favored its passage.
It was ordered engrossed for the third reading. The bill [S. 89--Mr. Winterbotham's] for the repeal of the savings bank law coming up with a committee report recommending indefinite postponement
Mr. WINTERBOTHAM hoped the report would not be concurred in. Under the present law the poor may be robbed of their hard earnings, and it ought not to remain on the statute books, for there is no protection under it to the depositors. He moved to amend the report by appropriately insert the words "that the bill do pass" instead of the recommendation for indefinite postponement.
Mr. BRISCOE also hoped that the report would not be concurred in. He regarded these savings bank and national banks as a curse to the earth, and things that ought to be wiped out of existence.
Mr. COFFEY favored indefinite postponement. Gentlemen in favor of national banks desire this law repealed, and wished to see saving banks stricken down. If this were passed into a law, what will be the result? In every county where there is a savings bank that institution would proceed to wind up its affairs and collect their outstanding claims, institute suit against perhaps one-half of the citizens, foreclose mortgages upon their real estate, and thus result in injury to these localities by bringing distress to many. If they are forced to proceed to collect their paper through process of law, judgments will be obtained, executions will issue, lands will be levied upon and sold at a sacrifice, and in many instances the property of the debtors will not sell for enough to satisfy the debt, and as a result depositors will have to lose their money.
Mr. REEVE: The history of savings banks in the past few years in the United States justifies the statement that there should be either an unconditional prohibition of all savings banks, or else that kind of legislation enacted for the protection of depositors which it is almost impossible to enforce. Shall we permit these things to stand without further protection? The metropolitan press have been burdened with cries for the protection of the people from these savings banks for years, and to-day ninteen-twentieths of such institutions are in the hands of receivers. As soon as savings banks are wiped out the general Government will afford facilities for the poor to save their money in small sums where the security is undoubted.
Mr. BRISCOE thought every man who had the good of the people at heart at least should approve the amendment. How many thousand times have the confidence of the people been betrayed by these savings banks? If this act be repealed much weeping and wailing will be saved to the poor people of the State. He characterized national banks as a great political swindle, and spoke in favor of the pending amendment.
Mr. WINTERBOTHAM said not one of the savings banks known to him confines itself to the law. When aid and comfort is given to such a law as is not on our statute book we enable these men to take money from the poor and divert it to their own use. Their managers are not responsible for a dollar. This bill gives them ample time to close up their business, and it should speedily become a law.
Mr. LEEPER made an ineffectual motion--yeas 12, nays 23--to lay the bill and amendment on the table
Mr. REEVE called attention to the fact that all except two of the savings banks in this State have violated the provisions of their charters, if not in some other way, at least in the one things of loaning money outside of the county in which the institutions is located.
Mr. LEEPER referred to the fact that savings banks have been a success in the East; and in the State of New York, where they are operated under a law almost precisely like the one in Indiana. If our law is weak in any particular, it ought to be amended. As for his county, not a single man, woman, child or newspaper is in favor of winding up these banks, as far as he had heard; and he would oppose this bill.
Mr. STREIGHT insisted the savings bank system has been beneficial as well as injurious. It has taught many to be saving: but, having come upon too troublesome times, losses had to follow, on account of shrinkage. It has been utterly impossible to handle large or small sums with safety. The worst thing this Legislature can do is pour out arguments of distrust in the ears of the people; and to pass a law to wipe these institutions out of existence would be a mistake. Instead of tending to break down confidence, the effort should be to build it up.
Mr. LEEPER said the banks in his town are managed by responsible men who have the confidence of the citizens there, and he was well satisfied not one dollar would be lost by any depositor so long as they are in the hands of the present managers; and he objected to such banks as these being made scape goats for others in other places which have been badly managed.
Mr. COFFEY was not special advocate of savings banks, but he thought it impolitic and unwise at this time to repeal this law, as it would result in great evil to many localities in this State. In most of these banks depositors are not likely to lose much if any money by their mismanagement.
The Senate then adjourned.
The readings for the journal of yesterday's proceedings was dispensed with.
The bill [S. 432] to amend section 10 of an act to establish a House of Refuge for the correction and reformation of juvenile offenders--may receive infants between the ages of 7 and 16--was read the first time and passed to the second reading.
Mr. ALLEN from the
Mr. Overmeyer's bill [H. R. 668] to establish a board of pardons; Mr. Bearss' bill [H. R. 669] to amend sections 19 and 20 of an act for the opening, vacating and changing of highways; Mr. Brown's of Steuben bill [H. R. 670] to legalize the official acts of the board of trustees of the town of Angola; Mr. Caldwell' bill [H. R. 671] appropriating $15,000 for the expenses of this special session of the General Assembly were severally read the second time and ordered to be engrossed for the third reading.
The judiciary committee, returned the bills [S. 313] to legalize sheriffs' administrators', guardians' and commissioners' sales in certain cases--where printed in English in newspapers printed in the German language; also, the bill [H. R. 654] to provide for the release and satisfaction of judgements against persons at the time of being adjudged bankrupts; also the bill [H. R. 650] to amend sections 6 and 635 of the general practice act; also, the bill [H. R. 651] supplemental to section 352 of the general practice act, approved June 18, 1852; with favorable reports thereon, which reports were severally concurred in, and the bill ordered to be engrossed for the third reading.
The same committee returned the bills [H. R. 655] to amend section 447 of the general practice act; also, the bill [H. R. 646] to change the name of the Marion criminal circuit court, with recommendations that they law on the table, which reports were severally concurred in.
The same committee returned the bill [H. R. 652] to amend sections 18 and 22 of an act for the incorporation of towns, with a recommendation that it be indefinitely postponed, which was concurred in.
The following described bills were introduced, read the first time and passed to the second reading:
By Mr. BRIGGS, [H. R. 672] to legalize the acts of the board of trustees of the town of Merom. in Sullivan county.
By Mr. WATSON, [H. R. 673] to amend sections 210 and 211 of the general practice act.
By Mr. ALDEN, (for Mr. Allen, of Putnam), [H. R. 673] to define certain practices in the courts, including mayors' courts, etc.
Mr. CAMPBELL called up his bill [H. R. 642] to legalize the incorporation of the town of Walton, which was read the third time and passed the House by yeas 71, nays 5.
Mr. CARTER called up the bill [S. 374] to alter and amend the charter of the town of Clarksville, etc., which was read the third time and failed to pass the House by yeas 33, nays 41.
Mr. WILLARD moved to reconsider the vote just taken, and also moved to lay the motion to reconsider on the table.
The motion to lay on the table failed by yeas 20, nays 53.
The motion to reconsider was then agreed to by--yeas 57, nays 19.
On the motion of Mr. JOHNSON the bill was recommitted to the
Amendments were also submitted by Messrs. Willard and Overmeyer which, by consent went to the same committee.
Mr. COMPTON called up Mr. Willard's bill [H. R. 643] to amend section 58 of an act to repeal all general laws now in force for the incorporation of cities--taxes may be assessed and collected on personal property of all persons residing within one mile of the corporation lines of any city where the parties may be engaged in business inside the city limits.
Mr BEARSS was opposed to the bill because it reaches outside of the corporation to tax personal property for city purposes
Mr. WORKS and Mr. MIERS thought this bill was clearly wrong, and ought not to pass.
Mr. VAN PELT said it would be unfair to lax persons outside the city limits who were unprotected by the city fire department and had not the advantages of other city improvements.
The bill failed to pass the House by yeas 3, nays 70.
Pending the roll call--
Mr. EDWINS, in explanation of his vote when his name was called, said he did not believe in taxing the property of a man who lived a mile outside the city, simply from the tact that the man did business in the city.
Mr. FAULKNER,when his name was called in explanation of his vote, said : As he did not believe in these slick-haired gentlemen reaching out all over the State to tax us farmers to help keep up their city style. He voted "No."
Mr. CONFER called up Mr. Garroutte's bill [H. R. 604] requiring all regular passenger trains on railroads to stop at all stations of incorporated towns or clues, which was read the third time.
Mr. GARROUTTE said this was a bill in which his constituents were very much interested. It was great inconvenience to parties living in smaller towns when going home to be compelled to ride by their stations from four tonight or 10 miles, or be compelled to wait as many hours after their business is completed for the train designated to stop at the station nearest their homes. He hoped the bill would pass.
Mr. WORKS said: This bill proposes to fine a railroad company if it fails to stop its trains at certain towns on the line of its road. This, he thought, could not be done. The constitution provides that the person prosecuted shall have the right to meet the witnesses face to lace. How would you bring a corporation race to face with a witness? The statute provides that the defendant shall be arrested. The sheriff could hardly arrest a corporation. If the company should fail to pay the fine it could not he imprisoned. The statute also provides that upon the trial of a defendant he shall be present in person, unless some responsible person will become responsible for any fine that may be imposed, if no responsible person should appear, as required, the company could not be tried ; therefore the bill, if passed, could have no effect, and therefore no such law should be placed on the statute book.
Mr. EDWINS was in favor of railroad trains stopping at all stations and at all times. The roads were built for the accommodation of the public. He was surprised to see gentlemen on this floor always favoring corporations as against individuals.
The bill failed to pass the House of Representatives by--yeas 30, nays 38.
It being near 12 o'clock, a motion was made that when the House adjourns it adjourns till Monday afternoon, which gave rise to considerable discussion. When the question came to a vote, the yeas and nays were demanded, and being ordered and taken discovered no quorum present. A call of the House followed and was continued in the vain endeavor to bring in a quorum till near two o'clock--the doors being kept locked for a portion of the time and the doorkeepers sent after absentees. Members reported as under arrest by the doorkeeper were excused, further proceedings under the call were dispensed with on the appearance of a quorum and at ten minutes after two o'clock--
The House adjourned till Monday morning at nine o'clock.
The minutes of Saturday's proceedings were not read.
Indefinite leave of absence was granted Mr. REEVE on account of the dangerous illness of his sister.
On motion by Mr. BURRELL his bill [S. 427] to amend sections 1 and 2 of the act regulating public warehouses--by striking from sec. 1 the words "for one year thereafter," so as to keep the record for future use, and amending sec. 2 so that more than one building or room may ; be used under a single permit--was read the second time and ordered engrossed for the third reading.
On motion by Mr. BENZ the bill [S 426--Mr. Poindexter's] to amend sec. 3 of the act concerning the organization of voluntary associations so as to prevent voluntary associations from making any distinction on account of nativity, complexion or religious or political belief, in the dispensation of charity was read the second time and ordered engrossed.
On motion by Mr. COMSTOCK, his bill [S. 429] to legalize certain acts of the town of Washington, Wayne county, and the election held thereon in 1878, was read the second time and ordered engrossed.
On motion by Mr. LEEPER, his bill [S. 253] defining the manner in which certain lands and properties in cities and towns may be taxed for corporation purposes--plats used for agricultural purposes shall not be taxed for city or town purposes a greater per cent. than in civil townships--was read the second time and ordered engrossed.
On motion by Mr. WINTERBOTHAM his bill, [S. 89] to repeal the act creating savings banks, was taken up, but before it was read--
Mr. HARRIS moved to indefinitely postpone it.
Mr. WINTERBOTHAM believed before another session of the Legislature convenes every savings bank in the State would be in bankruptcy, and this Legislature will be blamed for not taking action on this matter, so as to save much suffering to the poor laborers and servant girls who have trusted and will trust these institutions with their hard earned savings. He appealed to the Senate not to postpone this bill, but on the contrary to perfect and pass it into a law.
The motion was rejected by yeas 8, nays 28.
Mr. COFFEY regarded the bill as very defective. He moved its reference to the
Mr. WINTERBOTHAM reminded the Senate that this bill was in the hands of the
Mr. LEEPER favored the motion to refer. He denied any design on the part of the
Mr. STREIGHT regarded this as an unfavorable time to rush this measure through. He favored the reference to a committee and a full consideration of the bill before it is put upon the final vote.
Mr. WINTERBOTHAM insisted there was no better time than now to take definite action on this bill; he desired it to be perfected and put on its passage without further delay.
Mr. LEEPER made an ineffectual demand for the previous question.
The motion to refer was rejected by--yeas 13, nays 25.
Mr. BURRELL moved to substitute for the committee report an amendment to the bill allowing two years time for savings banks to wind up their business. Under the operations of the previous question demanded by him, this substitute was adopted by--yeas 32, nays 2.
Mr. LANGDON was opposed to this scheme from beginning to end. He believed it fraught
with disaster to the best interests of the State. Savings banks are founded for the
purpose of encouraging Industry, and of creating hope in the breast of those whose
savings are small. The savings banks system is comparatively new in this State, yet
millions of money have been taken from where it otherwise would have been wasted, and
directed into the channels of trade, at the same time benefiting those who, on saving
small sums, have been induced by these institutions to entrust money to their care. To
require within 21 months that these hundreds
Mr. CADWALLADER also believed the passage of this bill would be detrimental to the interests of the State, and therefore opposed it.
Mr. GRUBBS believed the bill would work disaster in the winding up of some 20 odd savings banks in this State.
Mr KRAMER would rather modify the savings bank law than to abolish it, as is proposed in this bill.
The motion to adopt the bill was rejected by yeas 19, nays 20.
Mr. HART offered a resolution giving precedence to the general and specific, fee and salary and apportionment bills priority, and as soon as they are passed declaring that "we will adjourn."
Mr. FOWLER offered as a substitute a concurrent resolution that this General Assembly will adjourn sine die on Monday next at meridian.
Mr. BURRELL made an ineffectual motion--yeas 62, nays 27--to lay the substitute on the table.
Mr. BURRELL moved to add a proviso, "that the general and specific appropriation bills and the congressional apportionment bill, the fee and salary bill and the metropolitan police bill shall have been passed by the Senate and House of Representatives," which was rejected, on motion by Mr. Grubbs--yeas 26, nays 23.
Mr. BURRELL moved to add a proviso, "that the general and specific appropriation, fee and salary bill, and congressional apportion merit bills shall have passed the Senate and House of Representatives."
Under the operation of the previous question, demanded by Mr. BURRELL, and a division of the propositions in the proviso, demanded by Mr. FOWLER, the general and specific appropriation division of the amendment was agreed to by--yeas 33, nays 7; the fee and salary division was also agreed to by yeas 34, nays 5; and the congressional apportion meat bill division of the amendment was also agreed to by--yeas 20, nays 17.
The amendment, as a whole, was adopted by yeas 20, nays 16; and the substitute, as amended was also adopted.
On motion by Mr. HARRIS the general appropriation bill [H. R. 592] was taken up and read as amended by the Senate for the third reading, pending the reading of which
Came the recess till 2 o'clock.
Mr. LEEPER made an ineffectual motion to recommit the bill with instructions to reduce the appropriation for current repairs on the Asylum for the Insane.
Mr. STREIGHT moved to recommit the bill with instructions to amend so as to make the salary of the Adjutant General $825.
On motion by Mr. WINTERBOTHAM this motion to recommit was rejected by--yeas 22, nays 21.
Mr. VIEHE introduced a bill [S. 456] to provide for the government and discipline of the State prison (similar to the bill S. 27--see these reports Feb. 15 a. m., 17 p. m. and 18 a. m. which passed both Houses last session, but failed to receive the signature of the Governor because not presented within the time prescribed by the constitution), which was read the first time.
Mr. MENZIES moved to amend the bill by adding to section 20 a declaration that the warden selected on the llth of this month by the board of directors of the Northern prison, declared elected at the last session of this General Assembly, shall hold the office of warden for four years. He said those having the custody of law breakers should not be allowed to remain in the relation of breakers of the law themselves, and consequently this question ought to be speedily settled. He moved the bill and amendment be referred to a special committee of five lawyers (declining to serve on such committee himself), for the question is purely a matter of law. with instructions to report as soon as possible, in order that this disgraceful thing now going on in the northern end of the State may be settled, as to who shall or who shall not have charge of the Northern penitentiary for the next three or four years. If the parties now in possession have a right to it, let them have it, and avoid having a penal institution dragged into court and an unseemly and disgraceful wrangle going on for years.
Mr. STREIGHT, being a friend of the bill hoped the amendment would not prevail, The question of law may come up at some other time, and he wanted the board of directors to be the managers and indeed and truly the board of control of the prisons. He objected to the principle of putting the wardens of the prisons under the control of the directors,
Mr. KENT knew of no better way of settling this difficulty than by the amendment proposed. The directors have the power of electing a warden only as granted them by the Legislature, and the same authority can deprive them of that power.
Mr. MENZIES said his amendment simply legalizes the acts of the recently elected directors. This Legislature has the power to take this unseemly rivalry out of the courts. With a State penal institution now in possession, as one side contends, of law-breakers themselves, we would be neglectful of a plain duty, being in session, if we do not settle this dispute, and settle it speedily.
Mr. WINTERBOTHAM said this bill had passed both Houses and given universal satisfaction, and would now have been a law if it had gone before the governor within the time prescribed by the constitution, and to day he [Mr. Winterbotham] would not cross a "t" or dot an "i" in it. To legislate here now for or against one party or the other would be wrong. If the bill was a proper one last session it is a proper one now. He favored the original bill, and would vote against it if changed for or against either of these contending parties.
Mr. LANGDON said the bill as now introduced has a modification providing that a warden may be removed by the directors for cause; and that clause obviates one objection. He contended that it is proper to adopt such measures as will speedily quiet this trouble in a public institution, which he hoped would be passed upon and settled outside of the courts.
The motion to refer to a special committee was agreed to, and the LIEUTENANT GOVERNOR made the committee to consist of Messrs. Viehe, Langdon, Kent, Dice and Urmston.
On motion by Mr. POINDEXTER his bill S. 426 (described early in these reports this morning) was taken up, and under a dispensation of the constitutional restriction, was read the third time.
Mr. P0INDEXTER explained that the board of county commissioners being authorized to pay 25 cents a day for the support of children in orphan asylums, this bill is simply for the purpose of authorizing the same to associations organized expressly to take care of colored children; that colored children, under such circumstances, shall be entitled to 25 cents a clay, the same as white children.
Mr. HARRIS made a similar explanation of the provisions of the bill.
Mr. TAYLOR said it has been found practicable in some parts of the State to organize separate Orphan Asylums for colored children, and this bill simply proposes to place such on equal footing under the law with Asylums for white children.
The bill passed the Senate by yeas 40, nays 3.
On motion by Mr. FOSTER, his bill [S. 171] for an act to make a house breaker guilty of burglary,with a penalty of imprisonment, from two to 14 years, was read the second time with committee amendments, proposing to punish attempts to commit felony, which were concurred in. On his further motion the constitutional rules were dispensed with and the bill read the third time and passed by yeas 42, nays 0.
Mr. WOOLLEN from the special committee thereon, returned the fee and salary bill [H. R. 344] with a substitute therefor embracing new matter which being read--
Mr. STREIGHT moved that the Senate resolve itself into a committee of the whole for the consideration of this bill. It is one that should be considered deliberately, dispassionately and carefully.
Mr. MOORE moved to postpone the further consideration of this bill until to-morrow afternoon at 2 o'clock, and make it the special order for that, hour.
Mr. GARRIGUS favored this motion. Such an important measure as this should be carefully considered, and members should have time to compare this bill with the existing law.
The motion to postpone [Mr. Moore's] was agreed to.
On motion by Mr. STREIGHT, the
Mr. URMSTON moved to take up the bill [H. R. 59] to allow appeals from county commissioners' courts in certain cases.
Mr. BURRELL made an ineffectual motion to take up the contested election case of Sansberry vs. Smith (the sitting senator from the counties of Delaware and Madison).
On motion by Mr. HARRIS, the Senate proceeded to consider the report of the
Mr. SARNIGHAUSEN moved to strike out the item appropriating $62,000 for the purchase of the State Fair Grounds. He believed there were real estate speculators enough in Indianapolis, and thought there was no necessity for the State going into that business. Two years ago the State Board asked for $25,000, saying that would be the last, and now they ask for $62,000 more.
Mr. WINTERBOTHAM said this appropriation was recommended on the understanding that the ground would be sold under a first mortgage, the State now holding a second mortgage to secure the $25,000 referred to. It is only a question of policy whether the State will lose the $25,000, already in it., or pay this $62,000 and take the grounds, now valued at $80,000.
Mr MENZIES inquired whether, as a business proposition, it would not be better to lose the $25,000, and sever all connection with it?
Mr. HARRIS recited the history of this case. Prior to 1860 the State Fair was held on ground belonging to the State. Then the State Board of Agriculture purchased the 36 or 40 acres of ground referred to. The exposition building was put up by subscriptions nude by the citizens of Indianapolis, the railroads, etc. The exposition was not a success, and the State Board became involved in debt. Two years ago the State Board obtained an appropriation from the State treasury of $25,000. There was a time when this 36 acres of ground was supposed to be worth $5,000 or $6,000 per acre. The State has advanced $25,000, has encouraged the agricultural interests of the State, and now the question is: Had the State better continue to encourage the interests of agriculture by purchasing this ground at a cost $62,000 or lose the $25,000 already invested in it? When the loan was made some two or three years ago this property was appraised at $180,000 the loan was one third of the appraised value. An appraisement made two years ago by 13 business men, put the value at from $180,000 to $255,000. Others say it is now worth as an investment from $1,500 to $2,500 an acre. Twelve appraisers aggregate $81,000 as the present value of this property. The first mortgage is $60,000 principal, and about $2,000 interest is due. This ground would subdivide five lots to the acre, which at $10 a foot would be $2,000 an acre. It lays high, the street railroad runs to it, and $2,000 an acre would be marvelously cheap.
Mr. STREIGHT: There are on that ground buildings that would not be put up for less than $50,000. To his mind the State Fair was worth more to the State every year than the amount of money involved. The State can make this investment without a prospect of loss, and the State Board of Agriculture would be saved the expense of making new arrangements all around. We hope for more prosperous times, for better days, and this is no time for the State to show a cold shoulder to this great agricultural interest. By making this appropriation the State will save to the Board of Agriculture buildings to-day worth probably $50,000. It is as clear as the sun at noonday that this property is worth not only the money now asked for, but all it is mortgaged for besides. It is worth to-day at least $80,000.
Mr. TRUSLER insisted the interest, of the State has been greatly advanced by this Board, and if this appropriation is not made it may terminate the work of that Board. When agriculture suffers every other interest suffers. He believed the State would not lose any money by this appropriation, and at the same time it would aid the greatest of all worldly interests--a something handed down by God Himself to man. Whenever anything here detrimental to that interest he will be found raising his voice against it. Because it is in an embarrassed condition are we to take a step backward and strike down the only institution in the State friendly to the farming community? If the State don't advance this $62,000 her $25,000 already in there will be lost. The State can lose nothing if it takes this ground; but should it prove a little sacrifice, is it not worth the effort?
If the State board have made some mistakes in the tight times of the past it was not done knowingly. The Board of Agriculture has been the means of improving the agricultural interests of the State very greatly, and he urged senators to vote in favor of the appropriation.
The Senate then adjourned.
The reading of the journal of Saturday's proceedings was dispensed with.
The bill [S. 432] to amend section 10 of an act to establish a House of Refuge for the correction of juvenile offenders--may receive infants between the ages of 7 and 16--was read the second time and passed to the third reading.
Mr. Briggs' bill [H. R. 672] to legalize the acts of the official Board of Trustees of the town of Marion, in Sullivan county, was read the second time and ordered engrossed.
Mr. Watson's bill [H. R. 673] to amend sec-[tions]
Mr. Allen's, of Pirnaru bill [H. R. 674] to define certain practice in the various courts, including the mayor's court, was read the second time and ordered to be engrossed for the third reading.
Mr. Drake's bill [H. R. 675] to amend the 14th section of an act defining felonies, was read the second time and ordered engrossed for the third reading.
The following described bills were introduced, read the first time and passed to the second reading:
By Mr. WORKS, [H. R. 676] to amend section eight of an act, supplemental and amendatory of an act for the uniform assessment of property.
By Mr. STUCKER, [H. R. 677] to protect the honesty and purity of the elective franchise.
By Mr. OSBORNE, of Elkhart, [H. R. 678] to repeal an act to divide the State into Congressional districts.
By Mr. MARCH, [H. R. 679] to amend sections 9 and 11 of an act supplemental to an act prescribing the duties of the attorney general
By Mr. MAJOR, [H. R. 680] regulating the running at large of hogs.
By. Mr. BROWN, of Jasper, [H. R. 681] authorizing judges to give opinions in writing, and making the same a part of the record.
The
By Mr. MARCH, [H. R. 682] in relation to the license and sale of intoxicating liquors.
By Mr SHANKS, [H. R. 683] to provide for the prompt publication of the acts of the general and special sessions.
The bill [S. 53] to amend section 94 of an act of December 21, 1872, to provide for the uniform assessment of property, was read the first time and passed to the second reading.
It being apparent, there was no quorum present, the House look a recess until 2 o'clock p. m.
The House reassembled at 2 o'clock, p. m.
On the motion of Mr. WILLARD, the House then took a recess until 3:30 o'clock.
Promptly at the hour appointed, the speaker resumed the chair and called the House to order.
Mr. FAULKNER offered the following:
WHEREAS, The predecessor of the present incumbent of the office of attorney general collected large sums of money for the State of Indiana from the counties and county officers in the State, and,
WHEREAS, It is represented he has failed to account for, and pay the same over to the State as required by law,therefore,
Resolved, That a committee of five be appointed to investigate the affairs of said officer daring his said term, and ascertain what amount of money has been collected by said attorney general from any and all sources; what amounts thereof has been accounted for and paid over. and what amount, if any, has not been accounted for, and report the same fully to this House.
Mr. BLOCKLEY said: a certain county official on the expiration of his official term was sued on his bond to the amount of $3,178. Judgment was rendered and the money was paid to the full amount to the Attorney General, and upon examination there was but one thousand and nine dollars accounted for.
Mr. TULLEY moved to amend by adding "Attorney Generals Buskirk and Denny, back to March, 1873.
The amendment was agreed to, and the resolution as amended was adopted, and
The SPEAKER made the committee to consist of Messrs. Faulkner, Works, Stucker, Huthsteiner and Sleeth.
The House concurred in the Senate amendments to the bill [H. R. 663] to amend the charter of Evansville.
Mr. CONNOWAY called up his bill [H. R. 589] to authorize the township trustee of Union township, Union county, or his successor in office, to pay certain indebtedness incurred by the former trustee of said township, which was read the third time, and finally passed the House by yeas 64, nays 16.
Mr. CONNOR called up his bill [H. R. 530] to prevent the sale of intoxicating liquors on fair grounds, which was read the third time, and passed the House by--yeas 62, nays 14.
Mr. HEROD [for Mr. Copeland] called up his bill [H. R. 570] concerning licenses to vend foreign merchandise, to exhibit any caravan, menagerie, circus, rope dancing, puppet show, ventriloquism, legerdemain, opera or concert, or theatrical performance, etc., which was read the third time.
Mr. SLEETH said this bill diverts the money received from these traveling shows for licenses from the treasury of the Agricultural society to the county treasury.
Mr. VANPELT said that agricultural societies were hard up generally, and ought to be encouraged. He hoped the bill would not pass.
Mr. HUBBARD thought it was but very little difference which way the money went, to the Agricultural society or to the county treasury, so that these shows were compelled to pa a tax for their performances. It taxes a large class of performances that were never taxed before, and he thought it was a good bill, an he hoped it would pass.
Mr. WIMMER, would be willing to vote for the bill, provided, in counties where there were no agricultural societies, the money should go into the county treasury; otherwise, the agricultural societies should have the benefit of the money.
On the motion of Mr. HEROD, the bill was recommitted to a special committee of five.
The SPEAKER made the committee to consist of Messrs. Herod, Hubbard, Baker, Stucker and Shanks.
Mr. DAILEY called up his bill [H. R. 270] for the protection of the ballot box and preventing bribery in elections, which was read the third time, and finally passed the House by yeas 76, nays 0.
Mr. DAVIS called up Mr. Johnson's bill [H. R. 601] to prohibit the keeping of saloons or other houses, sheds or booths, for the purpose of persons congregating together for the purpose of drinking spirituous or malt liquors, which was read the third time.
Mr. JOHNSON had never been connected with any temperance society, but he was willing to lay down the proposition that everything that is an injury to society is a nuisance. If there is a man here who can show that a saloon is an advantage to community he would like to have him do so, for he assumed that a saloon is no advantage to anyone but the man that keeps it, and the mayors and marshals of cities and towns. If the school fund is benefited by it the court and poor house expenses are increased. The cause of nearly all the crime committed can be traced to a saloon. Young men from the country as well as the town are decoyed into saloons, and are there robbed.
Mr. WORKS saw one objection to this bill. The repealing clause is too broad. It would have the effect to repeal all the law we now have on the subject of selling intoxicating liquors. This bill would allow any person to sell liquors anywhere except in a saloon, and to any person, without violating the law. He was in favor of the principle of the bill, and believed it was wrong to legalize the sale of Intoxicating liquors in any way. With a proper amendment of the repealing clause he could support the bill heartily.
Mr. OWEN moved that the bill be recommit ted to a select committee of three.
Mr. WILLARD ineffectually moved--yeas 21, nays 58--to lay the motion to recommit on the table.
The motion to recommit was then agreed to.
The SPEAKER made this committee to consist of Messrs. Owen, Johnson and Lehman.
Mr. DONNELL called up his bill [H. R. 591] to amend the act regulating the granting of divorce, which was read the third time, and finally passed the House by yeas 71, nays 5.
Pending the roll call--
Mr. HUBBARD, when his name was called, said he believed there was but one reason for the granting of divorces, and that was the reason given in the holy scriptures; and as he did not like to vote against this bill he therefore asked to be excused from voting.
Mr. MIERS offered a resolution that when this House adjourn it adjourn to meet at 8 o'clock p. m. this evening. The resolution was rejected by--yeas 20, nays 63.
The bill [S. 171] in relation to felonies, was read the first time and passed to the second reading.
The bill [S. 426] to amend section 3 of an act concerning voluntary associations and their perpetuity, so as there shall be no distinction on account of complexion, nativity or religious belief, as to orphan children in the dispensation of charity, was read the first time and passed to the second reading.
Mr. LEHMAN moved that the committee on the bill H. R. 601, to prohibit the keeping of saloons, be increased to five.
Mr. SAINT moved to lay the motion on the table, on which motion the yeas and nays were demanded, pending which--
The House adjourned.
The minutes of yesterday were not read.
On motion by Mr. BRISCOE, the bill [H. R. 456] authorizing boards of commissioners to
grant relief to certain citizens, was read the first time and referred to the
On motion by Mr. SHAFFER,the bill [H. R. 377] to regulate the practice of medicine, midwifery and surgery, was read the first time and referred to a special committee of three which the LIEUTENANT GOVERNOR made to consist of Messrs. Shaffer, Woollen and Mercer.
Mr. VIEHE moved that the bill [S. 456] for the government of the State prisons be read the second time.
Mr. WINTERBOTHAM moved to amend by taking up the specific appropriation bill [H. R. 640.]
On motion by Mr. BURRELL--yeas 26, nays 17--the Senate agreed to consider the contested election case of James W. Sansberry versus Marcus C. Smith, the sitting senator from the counties of Delaware and Madison.
The report of the majority of the
Messrs. BURRELL and VIEHE each spoke in favor of their respective reports.
Mr. KENT made a few remarks favoring the majority report--referring incidentally to a jest spoken in the presence of a newspaper man, through which it obtained publicity, that Mr. K. had said Mr. Smith must go. Recognizing the fact that a majority of votes in the district were cast for Mr. Smith, Mr. K. should vote for Mr. S. to retain his seat.
The minority report was rejected by yeas 7, nays 39.
Mr. FOWLER, explaing, said: Believing that when a law was enacted it meant something when referring to elections as well as anything else, he would vote "no."
Mr. HART, when his name was called, said, while a pretty strong partizan, and regretting there was not a Democrat, in Mr. Smith's place, for we have felt the need of one [laughter], yet, unless convinced there had been fraud in his election, or the will of the people had been set aside, he would not vote to displace him.
Mr. TRAYLOR, when his name was called, in explanation of his vote, said, believing that where County Commissioners do not establish new precincts the old precinct is the legal precinct, he should have to vote "no."
Mr. WOOD, in explanation, said he should act upon the facts in this case and apply the rules of law to them, just as a judge would do. He had listened to these reports attentively and saw no case made that would authorize him to vote for the removal of Mr. Smith. The question of Democrat or Republican should not weigh anything in the scales of justice. The law in a case like this is very plain. No lawyer can be mistaken about it. The courts of nearly all the States have settled what statutes are mandatory and what are directory in election cases. The statutes violated in this case are plainly directory in their scope, and does not render the election void. There is no fraud or coercion charged. Every elector voted his sentiments freely and untrammeled. In the absence of fraud or coercion the violation of a directory statute does not, make the election void. The will and choice of the people can not be set aside on the ground of a technical violation of the law. He voted "no."
The result was announced as above.
The majority report was adopted by yeas 38, nays 8.
On motion of Mr. WINTERBOTHAM the Senate proceeded to the consideration of the specific
appropriation bill [H. S. 640], the question
being on the motion [Mr. Sarnighausen's] made yesterday afternoon to strike out the
amendment proposed by the
Mr. SARNIGHAUSEN: It has been said
Mr. KRAMER become satisfied, on inquiry, that it would be a great investment for the State to purchase the fair grounds in fee simple, especially as the board proposes to deed to the State all its property. The grounds alone, have been estimated at this time to be worth from $75,000 to $85,000. If this ground is not purchased, the $25,000 heretofore put in them by the State will be lost; and if it is bought, the State will get all back. He thought as a business proposition it is a good one and that the people would be satisfied with it.
Mr. HEFRON was opposed to the State engaging in real estate speculation, and argued that "it would be doing great injustice to the people to appropriate so large a sum at this time for such a purpose. If it be a good speculation why do not hundreds of men in the State put forward their money in aid of this Board and take advantage of this great chance to make a good bargain?" It is very evident that it would not be safe for the State to appropriate the sum asked for now. It the State must do something for this Board let her carry the indebtedness for one or two years longer, and in that rime there may be some other way opened by which the State can get her money back.
Mr. WIER opposed mixing the State up with this indebtedness--believing it to be all wrong. As he understood this matter, the people of Indianapolis are largely to blame for the embarrassment of the State Board of Agriculture: and the city of Indianapolis or Marion county should purchase these grounds, having more interest therein than the State has He opposed taxing the people of the State to pay for fair grounds for the benefit of the people of Marion county.
Mr. VIEHE doubted the propriety of investing that much, money in this property and Inquired whether tins debt can be carried two years by paying the interest?
Mr. URMSTON regarded the only question to be whether it would be better for the State to purchase these grounds and thereby save the $25,000 invested or whether she would lose more than $25.000 by making this purchase. The bonded debt that has priority over the State's claim is $60,000 and the records show no other. Now can the state save her $25,000 by taking the ground for $62,000, taking as true the statements made on this floor by the Senator from Marion yesterday, this property is well worth from $80,000 to $100,000, and this would be a good investment for the State. There are many reasons why this property will increase in value rather than decrease. If the State intends to do anything at all now is the time to do it.
Mr. OLDS reminded senators that two years ago they were told those grounds were worth from $l80,000 to $225,000, and that the grant made by the State was in the nature of a loan. We are now met by the argument that the State must pay $62,000, or lose what has already been invested, because the property is not worth anymore than the incumbrance upon it. Having been deceived in its value heretofore, he was disposed to believe now that the ground is not worth as much as the appropriation asked for. He was of the opinion that Marion county should buy these grounds, and not the State, believing but few of the people at large desired the State to make such an Investment. He did not believe if this amount be invested. that the State would be done with it, for when once purchased the argument would be made that all improvements become part of the realty, and the State must make all that may be required in the future. He opposed making any further appropriation, believing it better to lose the $25,000 which was obtained by deceiving the Legislature as to the value of the ground than to put this sum of money into it.
Mr. WOOLEN thought there was misapprehensiun in regard to the intention of the finance committee in recommending this appropriation. The intention was to leave this sum in the hands of the governor to protect the State's interest in this matter. The debt is due on the first day of January. 1881, bearing interest at 8 per cent. If this appropriation is not made and the interest not paid, the State will lose the $25,000 already advanced; but as it stands the State can probably make $10,000 or $15,000 by buying this ground, even though it should not be worth more than $50,000, which is probably too low an estimate. He suggested it to be the duty of the State to establish a third prison for those not hardened in crime, and these grounds and buildings would be an appropriate place for such an institution--the best location in the State. Under these circumstances he favored the appropriation.
Mr. GARRIGUS felt favorably disposed to this appropriation if it can be legally done; but he thought the spirit of the law would prohibit it. He read from the constitution, sec. six, art. 10. a clause prohibiting the assuming of the debt of any corporation, etc., by the State.
Mr. DICE thought this thing should be looked be looked at from a purely business point of view, as there was no difficulty in the constitutional question just referred to. Many things should be considered in the ratification of this purchase. He thought Indianapolis has not acted in good faith towards the state board or the people of the State, in not paying the subscription of her citizens toward the erection of the exposition building. If the purchase is made, he desired an amendment requiring of the state board a just yearly rental value for the use of the grounds. If the appropriation is not made there should be steps taken to provide for the payment of the interest, but the former plan is probably the best, all things considered.
Mr. HART would be far from encouraging the Legislature in any wild speculation, but as the State has already placed $25,000 in these grounds, it resolves itself into a business proposition. Then the State Fairs have been of great value to the people of the State, affording an opportunity for the concentration of the best stock in the State; and these fairs have induced a healthy rivalry in the keeping of better stock than heretofore.
Mr. WOOD favored the greatest good to the greatest number. The farming class exceeds in
number ail the other business men of the State. The business of agriculture towers above
all other avocations in comparison: The farming class pays the bulk of all the revenues
to support the State Government and all the institutions of the State; The State has
already paid $25,000. This will be lost unless we make this appropriation. It will be a
safe investment to make, and will also be a just
The motion to strike out was rejected--by yeas 20, nays 25.
Then came the recess till 2 o'clock.
Mr. FOWLER moved to suspend the order of business and take up the bill for the government of State Prisons [S. 456]. Mr. BENZ moved to take up the barbers' bill [H. R. 115]; but on motion by Mr. STREIGHT--yeas 27 nays 18--the general appropriation bill [H. R. 592] was read the third time and passed by yeas 34, nays 13.
The fee and salary bill being the special order for this hour--Mr. STREIGHT moved to take up the specific appropriation bill [H. R. 640], which was agreed to by yeas 24, nays 23.
Mr. COMSTOCK moved as a substitute for section 21 an appropriation of $9,500, to pay the interest on the first mortgage on the State fairgrounds. It seemed idle talk to fix the value of that ground at $100,000. It is worth just what it will bring. If the $62,000 is voted this year, more will be asked every year to come.
Mr. RAGAN states that this board had been self-sustaining down to 1863, when it had accumulated this ground, and had a surplus of several thousand dollars beside. From that time to last fall the exhibitions have been a failure. Last fall the board saved $5,000. As a matter of justice to the agricultural interest and the saving of the grounds from being swept into the hands of a foreign corporation, it was surely best to make the appropriation for this purpose.
Mr. TRUSLER moved to reject the substitute.
Mr. HEFRON favored the substitute as being decidedly the best policy.
Mr. WOOLLEN moved to add a proviso that the State Board agree to sell all its property in the State for $62,000 at the next meeting of the General Assembly, which was accepted by Mr. Comstock.
The substitute as amended was rejected by yeas 22, nays 26.
The amendment proposed by the
Mr. HARRIS offered an amendment appropriating to a Cincinnati firm $1,310.50, balance for heating apparatus for the State Normal school, received by the board in February, 1876. It was rejected by--yeas 20, nays 28.
Mr. HARRIS moved an amendment that this sum of $1,310.50 be appropriated to this Cincinnati firm, contingent on the certificate of certain officials that the claim is just. He made several short speeches in favor of it.
The amendment, was agreed to.
Mr. TAYLOR offered an amendment, which was agreed to, embracing eight claims amounting in the aggregate to $2,263, for swamp laud ditching, when the State officers shall certify them to be just.
Mr. HARRIS moved to amend the bill by allowing the State Librarian $100 for extra services in removing the State Library, which was agreed to.
Mr HARRIS also moved to amend the bill by allowing $612.00 for the statutes furnished senators 51 sets at $12 a set.
Mr. HARRIS spoke in favor of it as did also Messrs. OLDS and STREIGHT.
The agreement was agreed to.
The Senate amendments were then ordered to be engrossed.
Mr. DAVIS, by leave, submitted a report from the
Mr. STREIGHT made an ineffectual motion--yeas 25, nays 26--to adjourn.
Mr. DICE made a motion to recommit the report, which motion was laid on the table by yeas 24, nays 22, on the motion of Mr. MENZIES.
On motion by Mr. BURRELL, under the operation of the previous question demanded by him, the report was read, embracing a substitute for the congressional apportionment bill [H. R. 486].
Mr. BURRELL moved that the report be concurred in, and on that motion demanded the previous question, which was seconded by yeas 25, nays 22.
Mr. HARRIS raised the point of order that the report was not made in parliamentary form.
The LIEUTENANT GOVERNOR sustained the point of order.
Mr. BURRELL moved the report be referred back to the committee, with instructions to return the same immediately, and on that motion demanded the previous question. The demand was seconded, and, under its provisions, the motion was agreed to.
Mr. BURRELL, for the committee, returned. the report instanter, and similar proceedings were had as just above reported, until the report was concurred in by--yeas 24, nays 18; and these amendments were ordered engrossed.
The Senate, at seven minutes before 7 o'clock p. m., adjourned.
The reading of the journal was dispensed with.
The following bills were read the second time and referred to appropriate committees: Mr. Works' bill [H. R. 676] to amend sec. 8 of an act supplemental and amendatory of an act to provide for a uniform assessment of property; Mr. Stucker's bill [H. R. 677] to protect the purity of the ballot box; Mr. Osborne's of Elkhart bill [H. R. 678] to repeal the act dividing the state into congressional districts; Mr. Mardis' bill [H. R. 679] to amend sees. 9 and 11 of an act prescribing the duties of the attorney general; Mr. Major's bill [H. R. 680] regulating the running at large of hogs; Mr. Brown's of Jasper bill [H. R. 681] authorizing judges to give their opinion in writing; Mr. March's bill [H. R. 682] in relation to licensing the sale of intoxicating liquors; Mr. Shanks'bill [H. R. 683] to provide for the prompt publication of the acts of the General Assembly.
The bill [S. 53] for the uniform assessment of property; also the bill [S. 171] defining felonies; also the bill [S. 426] concerning voluntary associations, and their perpetuity, were read the second time and passed to the third reading.
The Senate concurrent resolution, looking to a final adjournment of the General Assembly on Monday, March 24, at 12 o'clock m., provided the general and specific appropriations, fee and salary bill and congressional apportionment bill shall have passed the Senate and House of Representatives, coming up--
Mr. SHANKS moved ineffectually--yeas 33, nays 49--to lay the resolution on the table.
Mr. WILLARD moved to amend by striking out the proviso.
Mr. SHANKS said he was opposed to the adoption of the resolution. Men never work well
under restraints; work thus done is carelessly done for fear of the expiration of time,
or not done at ail for fear of a want of time. So if you limit a man in the time in
which to
Mr. SAINT was opposed to passing any resolution fixing a time to adjourn. He thought these resolutions were entered as buncomb. It would be time for this session to adjourn when the work for winch it was convened shall be finished. If we set next Monday to adjourn the time will be taken up between now and then with dilatory motions to defeat the passage of a fee and salary bill. "
Mr. WILLARD desired to fix a time to adjourn, and work to that end.
Mr. AD WINS said it was the county officers who were clamoring for the adjournment, lest their fees and salaries should be reduced, and he had pledged his people to vote for a reduction of fees and salaries and to redistrict the State for Congressional and legislative purposes, and when that was done he was ready to go Home.
Mr. WATSON said we were here to do the business of the State, and as soon as we dispose of that business it was then time to adjourn. If there is anything to do go to work at it like men, and not consume the time with posing buncomb resolutions.
Mr. Willard's amendment was adopted by yeas 48, nays 45.
Pending the roll-call--
Mr. BAKER when his name was called, in explanation of his vote said: that so long as members of the Senate would be indulged in pocketing House bills for the purpose of defeating them, as he verily believed, he was opposed to the final adjournment until the Senate treat the House bill with proper respect.
Mr. THOMPSON moved ineffectually--yeas 37, nay 57--to lay the resolution as amended on the table.
Mr. LEHMAN then moved the adoption of the resolution.
Mr. THOMPSON moved that the further consideration of the resolution be postponed until next Saturday at 2 o'clock p. m.
Mr. WILLARD moved ineffectually--yeas 37, nays 63--to lay the motion to postpone on the table.
Mr. Thompson's motion to postpone until 2 o'clock p. m., next Saturday, under the operations of the previous question, was agreed to by yeas 62, nays 31.
Mr. LEHMAN moved that the business at adjournment last evening--to increase the special committee to which was referred Mr. Johnson's temperance bill [H. R. 601] from three to five--be taken up and disposed of.
Mr. TULLEY moved ineffectually--yeas 40, nays 50--to lay the motion on the table.
Mr. JOHNSON hoped the motion to increase, this committee would not prevail, as the committee were ready to report, and this was intended to delay.
Mr. LEHMAN thought this bill was not in consonance with the feeling of the people of the State, and thought it was due that the committee should be increased and that the subject have all the consideration it deserves.
Mr. DOOKE was satisfied that this committee should be increased. He wanted this bill duly considered.
Under the operations of the previous question the House agreed to increase the commitmittee by yeas 47, nays 44.
Subsequently the Speaker (Mr. English in the chair) named as the additional members of the committee Messrs. Taylor of Daviess and Briggs.
Mr. DAVIDSON called up his bill [H. R. 467] regulating descents, which was read the third time.
On the motion of Mr. WORKS the bill was recommitted with instructions to see that the bill was properly engrossed.
Mr. DRAKE called up his bill [H. R. 675] to amend the 14th section of an act defining felonies, which was read the third time and passed the House by yeas 60, nays 18.
Mr. DROVER (by request) called up the bill [S. 308] supplemental and amendatory of an act to provide for the uniform assessment of property, which was read the third time.
On the motion of Mr. WILLARD the bill was recommitted to the
Mr. EDWINS called up his bill [H. R. 419] to legalize the board of common council of the town of Elwood, Madison county, which was read the third time and passed the House by yeas 67, nays 13.
Mr. FAULKNER said that inasmuch as we have had a good deal of gas this morning and as he desired something more substantial he moved the House do now adjourn.
The motion was agreed to.
Mr. HUMPHREYS, from the
Mr. REED said: For the publication of the delinquent list there ought to be allowed a reasonable compensation. It was well known that printing offices had to keep on hand a certain amount of material in the way of brass rule, borders, quads, etc., which were costly, and were used in the country offices for nothing else. He thought 30 cents per description was little enough.
Mr. BRIGGS thought there was no doubt but certain material named by the gentleman from Miami (Mr. REED,) has to be kept on hand by the printer to be used in the publication of the delinquent tax list, but still he thought that 20 cents for each description was sufficient. In many counties where there was competition the publication had been made for even less than 20 cents, while in other counties the full amount allowed by law (50 cents for each description) had been charged and paid. In one instance he had seen a charge of $21.00 made for publishing 42 lots by number, where it only took four and a-half lines for the entire publication. Taking the description of factional tracts together with other descriptions, including the description of lots, which was very short, he thought the amount was enough, and that the bill should pass.
Mr. OWEN was willing that 25 cents should be allowed, but was not willing to allow any more
Mr. KELLEY had published several of the delinquent lists, and he thought, as we must come down to bed-rock, that 20 cents per description was enough.
The bill then finally passed the House by yeas 82, nays 3.
Mr. DALTON called up Mr. Overmeyer's bill [H. R. 668] to create a board of pardons. The governor, secretary, auditor, treasurer and attorney general shall constitute the board of pardons. No pardons, reprieves or remission of fines shall be granted, except by unanimous agreement of the board. Before any pardon can be granted the applicant shall give notice to the prosecuting attorney of the court wherein judgment was rendered against such applicant, and shall also publish three successive weeks in a newspaper in such county, which was read the third time, and paased the House by--yeas 73, nays 16.
Mr. FANCHER called up his bill [H. R. 492] for the protection of shade trees, which was read the third time and passed the House by yeas 60, nays 18.
The House then took up the general appropriation bill [H. R. 592]. The Senate amendments being read--
Mr. OVERMEYER said there was so slight a difference for so large an appropriation of money, he would move to concur in the amendments, being content with his votes heretofore given and recorded on the subject.
Mr. WILLARD was in favor of the Senate amendments except the proviso added to the fifth section.
The House then concurred in the Senate amendments by yeas 60, nays 31.
Mr. FAULKNER called up his bill [H. R. 188] to regulate fire insurance companies, and to provide for the canceling of policies of insurance therein named, and terminating certain contracts for insurance, etc., which was read the third time and finally passed the House by yeas 75, nays 5.
The House adjourned.
The minutes were not read.
Mr. BENZ, by request, introduced a bill [S. 457] to fix the time of holding courts in
the Second Judical district--the counties of Warrick, Spencer and Perry--which was read
the first time and referred to the
On motion of Mr. LEEPER his bill [S. 253] to declare that town plats less than 10 acres used for agricultural purposes shall not be taxed for town or city purposes at a greater rate than in the civil townships, was read the third time.
Mr. SARNIGHAUSEN hoped this bill would pass.
Mr. MENZ1ES explained: This bill is similar to the present law, except it fixes the rate of percentage according to the rate in the township. It will make plain the ambiguity of the statutes,
Mr. LEEPER also said this bill is simply explanatory of the law of 1877. It provides that lands inside of the corporation shall be taxed just as if they were not taken in.
The bill passed the Senate by yeas 39, nays 0.
On motion by Mr. BRISCOE the bill [H. R. 466]; authorizing county commissioners to make appropriations to certain citizens therein named--to liquidate any indebtedness or liability on the 25th of May, 1874, in aid of the construction of any railroad now completed and operated through such county--was read the second time. He explained its reference to a road built through the county of Grant, and made an appeal in behalf of the bill, declaring it nothing more than right and just that these parties should be relieved.
Mr. BURRELL thought this bill was carrying the matter a little too far. It is unfair to tax the people of the whole county for the benefit of one or two townships.
Mr. GRUBBS regarded the bill as just and right.
Mr. WINTERBOTHAM, while usually opposed to such bills, regarded this as right.
On motion by Mr. BRISCOE, the constitutional restriction was dispensed with, the bill read the third time, and passed the Senate by--yeas 31, nays 9.
Mr. HEFRON offered a concurrent resolulution for the distribution of the State geological reports, which was adopted.
On motion by Mr. KRAMER-yeas 23, nays 21--the Senate proceeded to the consideration of the committee's substitute for the fee and salary bill [H. R. 344].
Mr. SARNIGHAUSEN moved to increase the pay of the governor from $5,000 to $6,000.
Mr. SHIRK opposed this amendment.
Mr. WILSON moved $4,000 as a substitute.
Mr. WOOLLEN said this substitute would be manifestly unjust.
Mr. FOWLER referred to the faat that only about half a dozen States in the union pay their governors over $5,000, and he thought that enough.
The substitute was rejected by yeas 34, nays 12.
The amendment (Mr. Sarnighausen's) was also rejected by yeas 12, nays 35.
Mr. DICE moved to increase the pay of the governor's private secretary from $1,500 to $2,000.
Mr. TAYLOR moved to vote ample compensation for every officer, but he opposed this increase.
Mr. DICE referred to the fact that in the general appropriation bill the governor's clerk was stricken out, and consequently the Secretary will have extra duties to perform.
This motion for increase was rejected.
On motion by Mr. WINTERBOTHAM the salary of deputy secretary of state was increased from $1,280 to $1,500--yeas 24, nays 22.
Mr. WOOLLEN, the chairman of the special committee reporting this bill, explained that section 5 requiring the clerk of the printing bureau to fully and properly index and prepare the Senate and House journals and superintend their printing and proof-reading, would insure this work being done in a far better manner than ever before and save to the State the $600 usually voted to the two principal clerks of the Senate and the House for performing that service, which has never yet been done in a proper and satisfactory manner.
Mr. WOOD moved to increase the salary of auditor of state from $1,500 to $2,000.
Mr. HARRIS made an ineffectual motion--yeas 25, nays 23--to suspend the consideration of this bill that final action may be taken on the specific appropriation bill.
Then came the recess till 2 o'clock.
On motion by Mr. LEEPER the House amend merit to his land plat-taxation-for municipal-purposes bill [S. 253--described first in to-day's reports] reducing the number of acres from 10 to five, was read and concurred in.
The Senate resumed the consideration of the substitute for the fee and salary bill [H. R. 344].
On motion by Mr. HART the pending amendment [Mr. Wood's] was rejected by yeas 27, nays 17.
Mr. HART moved to resume the pay of the Adjutant General from $1,200 to $1,000.
Mr. STREIGHT moved to substitute $800, which was rejected by yeas 26, nays 20.
The motion [Mr. Hart's] was agreed to by yeas 29, nays 19.
Mr. OLDS made an ineffectual motion to reduce the salary of Q. M. General from $300 to $100.
Mr. SHIRK moved to reduce the salary of Treasurer of State from $3,000 to $2,500.
Messrs. KENT and WOOLLEN opposed the motion.--This is such a responsible position that the incumbent has to give a bond for $200,000.
Messrs. OLDS and COMSTOCK thought $3,000 a small compensation for this responsible position.
Mr. FOWLER could not vote to reduce the pay of an officer who has charge of from $2,000,000 to $3,000,O00 of the people's money.
Mr. STREIGHT believed this officer received more than $10,000 a year wherefore be favored the amendment. It was rejected by yeas 8, nays 40.
Mr. OLD moved ineffectually--yeas 7, nays 36--to increase the pay of the deputy treasurer of State from $1,500 to $2,000.
Mr. SARNIGHAUSEN believee $2,000 not too much.
Mr. BENZ moved ineffectually--yeas 6, nays 35--to increase the pay of the clerk of the Attorney General from $600 to $900.
Mr. FOSTER moved ineffectually--yeas 9, nays 32--to reduce the Attorney General's salary from $3,000 to $2,500.
Mr. FOWLER opposed this motion.
Mr. LANGDON moved ineffectually--yeas 18, nays 24--to increase the pay of Supt. of Public Instruction from $2,000 to $2,500.
Mr. BENZ moved to reduce the salary of superintendent's clerks from $900 to $600, which was agreed to by yeas 23, nays 21.
Mr. SHIRK made an ineffectual motion to reduce the salary of law librarian from $1,000 to $600.
Mr. TAYLOR moved to increase the clerk's fee for issuing marriage license from $1 to $2.
Mr. STREIGHT moved to reduce it to 50 cents, which was rejected.
The motion [Mr. Taylor's] was agreed to.
On motion by Mr. STREIGHT the clerk's fees for every writ or process under seal was reduced from 50 to 40 cents.
Mr. OLDS moved to strike out the clerk's fee of $1 from the losing party in each civil cause, to be paid into the county treasury.
Mr. DICE favored this motion.
Mr. HARRIS opposed reducing the docket lees.
Mr. KENT understood this fee is in direct opposition to the spirit of the constitution, and he doubted the propriety of taxing the unsuccessful litigant by the State. The payment of regular costs of the suit should be enough to demand of the losing party.
Mr. WOOD regarded this as a direct; tax for the purpose of raising revenue, and saw no constitutional objection to it.
Mr. COMSTOCK thought the law would justify such a tax.
Mr. FOWLER, regarded this taxing of docket fees all wrong in principle, and it is time Indiana should strike it down.
The motion to strike out was rejected by yeas 17, nays 29.
Subsequently Mr Harris made an ineffectual motion to increase this fee from $1 to $2.
Mr. KENT moved to increase the fee for issuing executions from 75 cents to $1. This is a work of considerable importance. Responsibilities attach to it, and sometimes the sheriff's return covers several pages. One dollar is not enough,but the fee ought to be at east that sum. Let the reduction come on unimportant work.
Mr. SARNIGHAUSEN thought 75 cents is not enough enough for this work.
Mr. SHIRK said the clerk receives large fees for the greater portion of the service, and the course pursued here will not bring about; any reduction in a clerk's fees, taken as a whole.
Mr. WOOLLEN explained the committee did not reduce on all the fees, but the intention was to make the reduction average from 10 to 15 per cent.
The motion [Mr. Kent's] was agreed to.
Mr. Coffey moved ineffectually--yeas 19, nays 25--to increase the pay for making a record for each 100 words, lour figures counting as a word from eight to 10 cents. He believed this bill would reduce the clerk's fees from 25 to 20 per cent., which was too great a decrease for the smaller counties
On motion by Mr. BURRELL, the words "for entering action on docket 10 cents" were stricken out and the following inserted in lieu: "For entering action on allot the dockets used by the clerk 10 cents each, not including bar docket."
On motion by Mr. COMSTOCK, the following fees of the clerk are to be paid out of the County Treasury upon the order of the Judge of the proper court: "For issuing and filing: each subpena for the grand jury, including all witnesses; for administering the oath to the grand jury; and for the certificate of allowances made by the court at each term." On his further motion, the clerk's fees for attending the Board of Canvassers are to be paid out of the County Treasury on the order of the Board of Commisioners.
The item "For entering on the order book: each order and minute of the proceedings of the court during term, and reading the same including the title of the cause, 10 cents," having been read--on motion by Mr. WINTERBOTHAM the following words were added thereto: 'For each 100 words thereof, four figures counting as one word: provided, that it the words in any entry be less than 200 words, for such entry 20 cents.1' On his further motion the item "For entering satisfaction of record of any judgment against a party to be made upon the judgment docket, 5 cts.," was changed so as to read: "For entering satisfaction of record, 5 cents."
On motion by Mr. LANGDON, the item "for filing, docketing and recording a transcript of a judgment to become a lien on real estate, and entering satisfaction of same, $1," was changed so as to read: "For recording a transcript of a judgment to become a lien on real estate, 10 cents for each 100 words, four figures counting as one word; for filing said transcript, 10 cents: for docketing the same, 10 cents, and for entering satisfaction thereof, 10 cents."
On motion by Mr. KENT, the fee for docketing each cause, for each docket, was increased from five to 10 cents.
On motion by Mr. FOWLER, a proviso was added, "that in all cases where suits are dismissed no docket fees shall be taxed."
Mr. TAYLOR moved to strike out the section (numbered 20) allowing the clerk 82 a day for attendance on court in person or by deputy, because that official gets paid by fees for every stroke of the pen and every act performed while in or out of court.
Mr. GARRIGUS thought in justice this section ought to be stricken out, as the clerk gets fees for every specific act.
The motion to strike out was agreed to by yeas 26, nays 14.
Mr. BURRELL moved an additional section (to be numbered 22 1/2) viz: "The clerks shall index all of the order "books, judgment dockets fee books records of all wills, probate records and all other records in his office, for which he shall be allowed two cents for each entry, to be paid out of the county treasury, upon an allowance made by the board of commissioners."
Mr. GARRIGUS had carefully compared this bill with the present law and declared it would increase the fees rather than decrease them as the people desire.
The motion [Mr. Burrell's]to add another section was rejected by yeas 14, nays 22.
Then the Senate adjourned.
The reading of the journal of yesterday's proceedings was dispensed with.
Mr. OSBORNE, from the
Mr. OSBORNE, of Elkhart, introduced a bill [H. R. 684] to authorize the redemption of certain lands sold for taxes, which was read the first time. On his further motion the constitutional rules were suspended--yeas 78, nays 9--the bill read the second time by title and ordered engrossed.
Mr. MIERS introduced a bill [H. R. 685] to legalize the acts of the board of trustees of the town of Elliottsville, Monroe county, which was read the first time and on his further motion the constitutional rule was suspended--yeas 70, nays 11--the bill read the second time, considered, engrossed, read the third time and finally passed the House by yeas 82, nays 1.
Mr. VAWTER introduced a bill [H. R. 686] to amend section 3 of an act to incorporate the town of Vernon, Jennings county, which was read the first time and on his further motion the constitutional rule was suspended--yeas 81, nays 3,--the bill read the second time by title, considered engrossed, read the third time and finally passed the House by yeas 86, nays 1.
Mr. SHANKS called up his bill [H. R. 683] for the more speedy publication of the acts of the 51st regular and special session, which was read the third time, and passed the House by yeas 77, nays 0.
The bill [S. 253] defining the manner in which certain lands and other property within the limits of a city, etc., may be taxed, was read the first time.
On the motion of Mr. PERRY the constitutional rule was suspended--yeas 72, nays 22--the bill read the second time by title, considered engrossed, and read the third time by sections.
Mr. TULLY and Mr. HEROD thought this bill was just and ought to pass.
Mr. ALLEN of Putnam was opposed to this bill, because he did not think small tracts should be taken into the city and city taxes imposed thereon.
Mr. OWEN moved that the bill be recommitted to a select comittee of three with instructions to strike out "ten" acres and insert "five,"
The motion was agreed to and the SPEAKER made the committee to consist of of Messrs. Owen, Tully and Herod.
Mr. ENGLISH called up his bill [H. R. 565] limiting taxation in incorporated towns having less than 25 free holders residing therein, which was read the third time and passed the House by yeas 65, nays 8.
The special committee thereon returned the bill [S. 253] with amendments as instructed striking out "10" acres and inserting "5" acres. The report of the committee was concurred in, the amendment considered engrossed and the bill finally passed the House by yeas 61, nays 19.
Mr. FLODDER called up the bill [S. 392] legalizing the practice of circuit courts in certain cases, etc., which was read the third time.
Mr. NAVE said the object of this bill was to legalize judgments rendered by default of the first day of the term. It had been the practice of some of the courts to make a summons returnable on the first day of the term.. The right of the court to render such judgments on the first day of the term had been questioned, and this bill was to prevent these judgments from being disturbed.
The bill finally passed by--yeas 66, nays 11.
Mr. GALBRAITH called up the bill [S. 216] to amend the act defining embezzlement, which was read the third time.
Mr. OSBORNE, of Elkhart, said this was a bill that had been before the committee, and they had submitted amendments, and he did not know how the bill came here without these committee amendments, unless they had been laid on the table. He thought, however, the bill would not accomplish the object the author intended.
Mr. THAYER said he thought there was an urgent demand throughout the State for a law of this kind.
Mr. TULLEY moved that the bill be recommitted to a special committee with instructions to strike out all after the enacting clause and insert the bill H. R. 393 on the same subject.
Mr. LEHMAN hoped that the Senate bill would be passed. To refer it now would virtually kill the bill.
Mr. HEROD thought there could hardly be fixed a penalty too severe for the man who would steal his employer's money. He was a worse thief than the man that robbed you at night. It was stealing his confidence as well as his money, and such men ought to be in the penitentiary. He was strongly in favor of the passage of the bill.
Mr. SAINT preferred the bill H. R. 393 (Mr. Bailey's) and was opposed to the Senate bill.
The House refused to recommit, and the bill S. 392 finally passed the House by yeas 84, nays 4.
Mr. HUMPHREYS introduced a bill [H. R. 687] to authorize a loan for the payment of the temporary loan debt heretofore incurred, which was read the first time. On his further motion the constitutional restriction was suspended--yeas 92, nays 2--and the bill read a second time by title only.
Mr. OVERMEYER thought the bill was not as carefully drawn as it should have been. He
would like to know when the loan was to be made, and just how much was to be borrowed.
the bill ought to go to a committee to be perfected. And on his motion it was referred
to the
Mr. HUBBARD offered a resolution that the Senate be requested, to return to this House Senate bill 253 for further action thereon. Pending the consideration of the resolution, the House took a recess till 2 o'clock.
The pending resolution [Mr. Hubbard's] calling for the return from the Senate of the bill S. 253, passed the House this morning, was rejected upon a division--affirmative 22, negative 23.
Mr. WORKS called up his bill [H. R. 678] to regulate the taxing of insurance companies, and providing for the publication of statements, etc., which was read the third time and passed the house by yeas 75, nays 3.
Mr. GAROUTTE called up the bill [S. 303] to amend section two of an act to enable farmers and other citizens of this State to form voluntary associations for insurance purposes,which was read the third time.
Mr. JOHNSON and Mr. GAROUTTE said the only difference between this bill and the old law is that this bill allows insurance against lightning as well as fire, which was a very small difference. The bill then passed the House by yeas 82, nays 0.
Mr. GINZ called up the bill [S. 338] for the protection of wild game, which was read the third time
Mr. M1ERS would like to see every section of the bill stricken out, except the enacting clause, and he did not care what became of that.
Mr. HUBBARD would like to protect the small birds especially.
Mr. HESS was in favor of the bill and would like to see it pass.
Mr. BRIGGS hoped the bill might be killed.
Mr. DAVIDSON said the farming community needed some protection in that line and he hoped the bill would pass.
Mr. EDWINS moved to recommit the bill to a special committee of three for amendment.
Mr. DAVIDSON moved to lay the motion to recommit on the table, which was agreed to yeas 49, nays 36.
Mr. SLEETH thought if we wanted a law to protect game, this was, perhaps, the best one we could get.
Mr. VANPELT said if he had his way, there should not be another bird killed for four years.
Mr. HART thought if birds were a nuisance to the farmer, he ought to have the privilege to kill them on his own premises. The bill then passed the House by yeas 60, nays 28.
The Senate concurrent resolution, authorizing the State librarian to distribute the reports of the State geologist to public libraries, members of the General Assembly, etc., was adopted.
Mr. ALLEN, of Putnam, called up his bill [H. R. 638] to legalize the acts of the new State House commissioners, which heretofore failed for want of a constitutional majority. It was read for information, and again failed to pass the House by yeas 30, nays 59.
Mr. DAVIDSON called up his bill [H. R. 467] to amend section 18 of an act regulating descents and the apportionment of estates, which was read the third time and finally passed the House by yeas 53, nays 30.
Mr. GOLDEN called up his bill [H. R. 286] to amend the act prescribing the duties of coroners, (to abolish coroner's jurors) which was read the third time.
Mr. DRAKE thought the finding of a verdict as to the cause of any person's death was too dangerous a matter to put in the hands of one man.
Mr. HESS said this bill done away with the expense of coroner's jurors, and he thought one man could do as well as a dozen.
Mr. SAINT thought, this a serious matter,and it seemed to him to open too great a temptation to cover up crime to put this in the hands of one man.
Mr. MIERS was in favor of the passage of this bill, because he thought it would save about $20,000 a year to the counties of the State.
The bill then passed the House by yeas 68, nays 18.
Mr. OVERMEYER, from the
Mr. SHANKS, from the special committee thereon, returned the bill [H. R. 570] concerning tax to vend foreign merchandise or exhibit any caravan, menagerie, circus, rope dancing, poppet shows, etc., with amendments and when so amended that the bill do pass. It is an exact copy of the law that has been upon the statute books since 1852.
Mr. COPELAND objected strongly against charging bankers 100 license per annum for selling their customers drafts, or cashing their drafts at par; while every lawyer, doctor or merchant was allowed to buy all the notes they might have money to purchase without a license. The law was enacted in 1852, when there was considerable business done buying gold, silver, and money issued by free banks denominated as uncurrent money. But now when gold, silver, greenbacks and National bank currency are all at par, the enactment of such a law would simply apply to all private banks, as no State law could be enacted that would compel National banks to pay any license. He therefore objected to this unjust discrimination. The House some three weeks ago voted down the same proposition--70 to 12--and it has been revived with a view of amending the old law so as to include concert saloons, which the House should readily agree to, but should not pass a bill so unjust to the private banks of this State.
Mr. DAILEY said if the poor man who goes around the country with a pack on his back shall be compelled to obtain a license, the man who speculates upon the misfortunes-in shaving notes--of his fellow man should also be compelled to pay a license.
Mr. SLEETH said: it was hardly fair to levy a tax upon a corporation organized under the laws of the State, while an organization of the same kind, nuder a charter of the United States can not be taxed by the State. He thought this bill would make an unjust discrimination.
Mr. WATSON objected to taxing a bank which is doing a legitimate business, and allow the curb-stone broker to do business without paying license.
Mr. ARNOLD, of Wabash, said: Banking is a necessary part of the business of the
country, and their legitimate business is the buying
Mr. HUBBARD said this bill was intended tax shows, theaters, etc., by the county, and that the Agricultural society should have the benefit of the money so collected.
Mr. TAYLOR of Daviess, would be compelled to vote against the bill on account of the mistakes in spelling and engrossment,and he moved that the bill be recommitted for correction.
The motion to recommit was agreed to.
Mr. HEROD offered a concurrent resolution, that inasmuch as Dr. W. H. Hester's character was assailed in the examination of the conduct of the affairs of the Hospital for the Insane, that he be allowed to appear before said committee with counsel and to cross-examine each and every witness.
The resolution was adopted.
Mr. VAN VALZAH introduced a bill [H. R. 688] to establish a militia or the State of Indiana, which was read the first time and passed to the second reading.
The House then adjourned.
The minutes of yesterday were not read.
Mr. STREIGHT offered the following resolution:
Resolved, That the congressional apportionment bill be referred to a committee of five, with instructions to report a bill dividing the State into 13 congressional districts as nearly equal in population as practicable, six of said districts to be Republican and seven to be Democratic, and in determining the political complexion of each county said committee shall take the votes cast for secretary of state in the election of 1878.
Mr. STREIGHT made a speech about 30 minutes long in support of his resolution. When he had concluded--
On motion by Mr. REEVE the resolution was laid on the table--yeas 26, nays 23.
Mr. BURRELL moved that the regular order of business be suspended, in order that the congressional apportionment bill [H. R. 486] may be taken up and read the third time, and, on this motion, he demanded the previous question, which was seconded by yeas 27, nays 22. Under its operation the motion was agreed to by yeas 27, nays 20, and the bill was read the third time. On his further motion, under the operations of the previous question demanded by him, and seconded by consent, the bill was put upon its passage, and finally passed, the Senate by yeas 26, nays 23, as follows:
YEAS--Messrs. Benz, Briscoe, Burrell, Coffey, Davis, Donham, Foster, Fowler, Hart, Hefron, Kent, Kramer, Leeper, Major, Menzies, Peterson, Reeve, Reily, Sarnighausen, Tarlton, Traylor, Urmston, Viehe, Wood, Woollen and Winterbotham--26.
NAYS--Messrs. Cadwallader, Comstock, Davenport, Dice, Garrigus, Grubbs, Harris, Kahlo, Landon, Mercer, Moore, Olds, Poindexter, Ragan, Shaffer, Shirk, Smith, Streight, Taylor, Treat, Trusler, Weir and Wilson--23.
Pending the roll call--
Mr. GARRIGUS, in explanation of his vote, said: For the reason that the counties he represents are placed in a district where 39,883 are required to elect a congressman, while in other districts only 32,000 are required, thus practically disfranchising 7,000 of the votes he had the honor to represent, he should vote "no."
Mr. GRUBBS, when his name was called, protested against the passage of this bill, believing this not the time for a congressional apportionment under law or precedent, and that it is entirely unfair, because it will give, under the vote in 1878, the Democratic party, with 194,000 voters, 11 representatives, while for the 220,072 votes against the Democratic party it will give but two Republican representatives. If the Democratic party is willing to stand by the record they make upon this bill we are satisfied and shall appeal to the common sense and fairness of the people of Indiana. He voted "no."
Mr. HEFRON, when his name was called, said, believing this bill complies with the letter and the spirit of the constitution; that respect has been had to the contiguity of territory, and to population, as nearly so as can be conveniently made; and that it is reasonable and fair to political opponents; as based upon the vote of 1876, which is the only proper and fair vote to take as a basis, it will give to the Republicans six districts and to the Democrats seven; and taking into consideration the fact that it has always been a cardinal principle with the Republican party that the minority have no rights it was bound to respect, he did not believe it has any right to complain, and so he should vote "aye."
Mr. KENT, in explanation of his vote, said: This bill is eminently fair--as fair to the Republicans as they could possibly ask--and from the fact that it wipes out a deep, dark and damnable infamy, which has been on the statute book since the Republican party has been in power in this State, he took great pleasure in voting 'aye."
Mr. MENZIES, when his name was called, said: It will not do for Republican senators to
say they are opposed to apportioning the States for congressional purposes, because the
last man of them voted for a resolution this morning declaring in favor of a
congressional apportionment based on the vote of 1878; and thus they stand committed on
the records of
Mr. REEVE,when his name was called, said: As this bill was disclosed to him it makes six Republican and seven Democratic districts. If this be true the Republicans have no reason to complain, until they go back over the history of Indiana legislation since the last apportionment was made, which has been execrated by everybody, even Republicans in every State, and give some satisfactory reason why, during all these years, they have never changed it, and made it, just and equal, as they now claim it, should be made. They are receiving more justice than they themselves administered. In the face of their persistent refusal to correct that which was a shame to the State, and a gerrymander which should make any political party blush, their pleas and appeals to let this matter go now, certainly sinks almost to the level of the ridiculous. Trusting to hear nothing more of this kind from Republicans now, or in any canvass hereafter, he voted ''aye."
Mr. SHAFFER, when his name was called, said he had no great cause for complaint in regard to the congressional apportionment as far as his district is concerned. Having heretofore been in a hopelessly large Democratic district, this bill magnanimously gives us a small show; so he felt not so ungrateful as far as that matter is concerned. But he was reminded of a story told by the senator from Marshall in regard to the boy with a piece of bread and butter, who said the butter was good and the bread was good, but he didn't like the way the damned thing was spread; [Laughter.] so he [Mr. Shaffer] didn't like the way this apportionment bill is spread all over the State, therefore he voted "no."
Mr. WOOLLEN, when his name was called, in explanation of his vote said: This is not just such a bill as he would like to see passed, but as the session is drawing to a close, and as we must take this or the one now on the statute book, and as this, in regard to population and the arrangement of territory, is so far superior to the present law, he voted "aye."
The result of the vote was then announced as above recorded, and so the bill passed.
Mr. BENZ moved to take up the fee and salary bill [H. R. 314]. Mr. KENT moved, as a substitute, to take up the State Prison bill [S. 456]. Mr. HARRIS moved, as a substitute for all, to take up the specific 'appropriation bill [H. R. 640), which was rejected by--yeas 23, nays 26. The motion to take up the prison bill was also rejected by-- yeas 20, nays 29; and then the Senate agreed to proceed with the consideration of the Senate committee's substitute for the fee and salary bill [H. R. 344].
On motion by Mr. SHIRK the vote of yesterday, by which section 6 was adopted, was reconsidered, and the salary of the clerk in the insurance department of the auditor's office was reduced from $1,500 to $1,200.
Mr. HEFRON, in reading the morning paper, noticed that an amendment was made yesterday to section 16, by which the county clerk's fees for entering each order was increased about 100 per cent. or more. He moved to reconsider the vote by which the section and the amendment referred to, was adopted.
These motions were severally agreed to.
On motion by Mr. WINTERBOTHAM, the House concurrent resolutions providing pay for expenses of House committees in visiting, State institutions, was adopted.
On motion by Mr. LEEPER, the House amendments to his lightning insurance bill [S. 303] were concurred in.
Mr. FOSTER moved to take up his bill [S. 103], and Mr. HEFRON moved to take up the bill H. R. 671; both of which motions were severally laid on the table.
The Senate then resumed the consideration of the committee's amendments to the House fee and salary bill, pending at the time of the recess for dinner.
The item "for entering on the order book each order and minute of the proceedings of the court during term, and reading the same, including the title of the cause, 10 cents- having been read--on motion by Mr. REEVE, the following words were added thereto "when the entry exceeds 100 words, 10 cents; and 10 cents per 100 words for all over 100"--as a substitute for the words added yesterday on Mr. Winterbotham's motion.
Mr. WOOD made an ineffectual motion to reinstate the section numbered 20, which was stricken out yesterday--yeas 16, nays 28,
Mr. KRAMER moved ineffectually to so amend as that county auditors shall receive pay for filing assessment lists and appraisers' returns.
Mr. BURRELL moved to amend by allowing county auditors a fee for filing assessment lists, appraisers' returns, county orders redeemed, and any receipt or voucher.
Mr. TAYLOR moved as a substitute to strike out the allowance of two cents for every paper and voucher filed by the county auditor.
Mr. KENT favored the amendment, but opposed the substitute.
Mr. URMSTON favored the substitute.
Mr. TRUSLER said the auditor of one of the counties he represents gets $2,000 a year, and would not give it up if the salary were but $1,000. He opposed the amendment, as well as the other propositions to increase these fees.
Mr. BURRELL opposed the substitute, and spoke in favor of his amendment.
The substitute was rejected, by yeas 23, nays 23--the Lieutenant Governor giving the casting vote.
The amendment was agreed to.
On motion of Mr. REEVE a, clause in section 25 was made to read "but the Auditor shall not be paid any fees for services in such cases where the county is the losing party and the costs are taxed against the county in favor of the successful party."
Mr. SHIRK made an ineffectual motion to reduce the the for the management of the permanent school fund from one to one-half per cent.
Mr. REEVE moved to strike out the clause requiring county auditors to pay for ail the stationery used in their offices except books and blanks. He said this provision is a preposterous piece of nonsense, and ought to be stricken out."
Mr. GARRIGUS insisted the section ought to stand as the committee left it.
The motion was rejected.
Mr. KENT moved to amend so as to pay the auditor for making out and delivering to the assessor the list of lands, lots and plats, and for the list of road tax furnished by the township trustee.
Mr. KRAMER protested against raising the fees higher than fixed in this bill. This bill now allows the auditor two cents for each paper filed, which is an allowance not contained in the law of '75. The fees of county treasurer in this State are not too high and should not be reduced.
On motion by Mr. REEVE the following was substituted for section 26: "Auditors shall furnish all blanks and stationery for affidavits or other documents for parties in which he receives a specific fee for the service rendered in using such blanks or stationery. Provided that the county shall furnish all books stationery and blanks required in doing the public business petaining to the auditor's office.
On motion by Mr. FOSTER the House amendments to his city water works bill [S. 103] requiring a majority of all votes cast, &c., were amended by adding a proviso for damages done to private water power.
On motion by Mr. BENZ the bill [H. R. 401] to legalize the record of certain plats of lots annexed to New Albany, was read, the first, second and third times under a dispensation of the constitutional restriction, and passed the Senate by yeas 41, nays 1.
On motion by Mr. VIEHE, the bill [H. R. 672] to legalize certain acts of trustees of the town of Merom, was read the first, second (by title only) and third times, by suspension of the constitutional rule, and finally passed the Senate by yeas 41, nays 0.
On motion by Mr. MERCER, the bill [H. R. 689] to amend section 74 of the act dividing the State into judicial circuits, etc., of March 6, 1873, affecting the counties of Dekalb, Steuben and Noble, was read a first, second and third times, under a constitutional dispensation, and passed the Senate by yeas 33, nays 6.
On motion by Mr. COMSTOCK, his bill [S. 429] to legalize certain acts of the trustees of the town of Washington, Wayne county, was read the third time and passed by yeas 33, nays 1.
And then the Senate adjourned.
The reading of the journal was dispensed with.
The following described bills were introduced, read the first time and passed to the second reading:
By Mr. SHUTT [H. R. 689] to amend section 74 of an act to divide the State into judicial circuits.
By Mr. ENGLISH, by request, [H. R. 690] to authorize the board of county commissioners to fill vacancies in the office of justice of the peace.
By Mr. STUCKER, [H. R. 691] providing for reducing the jurisdiction of the circuit courts and grand juries, and increasing the criminal jurisdiction of justices of the peace.
By Mr. ENGLISH, by request, [H. R. 692] to repeal sections 1, 2, 3, 7 and 8 of the act providing for the inspection of petroleum or other illuminating oils.
By Mr. HEROD, [H. R. 693] to authorize Thos. Mann to institute suit against the city of Indianapolis to recover money claimed to be due him from said city.
By Mr. HOPKINS, [H. R. 691] to amend section 50 of the city charter of Evansville,
By Mr. ENGLISH, by request, [H. R. 695] to authorize and enable the council of any incorporate town or city to remove any cemetery, or bodies therein deposited, whenever such cemetery shall become enclosed within the city limits, and a new cemetery provided.
Mr. March offered a concurrent resolution, which was adopted, instructing our senators and requesting our representatives to use their influence to amend the National banking law, in relation to the jurisdiction of the courts over controversies between banking associations located in any State or territory.
Mr. OVERMEYER offered a concurrent resolution that thia General Assembly will adjourn sine die on Saturday, March 22,1879 at 12 o'clock noon.
Mr. OVERMEYER said: We have now had nine days of the special session, at a cost to the people of about $1,500 per day. We have come as near to the accomplishment of nothing as could well be done in the time. All real work that is of any importance to the State, which we have done during the special session, could have been done in one day. The specific appropriation bill is on its third reading in the Senate, and could be massed and sent to the House now at any time within 20 minutes. In two hours the bill could be finally disposed of and if we can not complete the fee and salary bill to-day it will be because there is no very strong desire to complete it. Why, then, should we set here longer than until noon on Saturday? If all the political bills, in which Democrats feel an interest, have not been disposed of, shall the whole people continue to pay for keeping the Legislature in session simply because such political bills may be labored on farther? The people did not expect that we would hold a special session at all, and there was no necessity for the wasting of the regular session in such manner as to require a special session. The appropriation bills might easily have been completed at the regular session, and on any one day of this special session these bills might have been finished. It is evident to every member that the usefulness of this General Assembly is at an end. General business is neglected, and only political measures attract attention. Politics have been the bane of this Assembly. The business of the people has from the first been thrust aside, in order that the business of the Democratic party be finished. When committees should have met, a Democratic caucus intervened. When measures of importance to the people should have been considered, the Democracy interfered with political gerrymanders in a dozen shapes.
Mr. MIERS moved to amend by inserting Monday noon instead of Saturday noon. He said:
The gentleman from Jennings (Mr. Overmeyer) says we have had political legislation
enough. I am glad to see the gentleman from Jennings satisfied with political
legislation for once in his life; he has more capacity for that kind of legislation
than any other gentleman I know of- I think we have had about enough; we only lack one
more act, and that is to pass the Congressional apportionment bill, and thereby wipe
from our statute books the odious gerrymander made by the Republican party, backed up
and agged on by the gentleman from Jennings. As to the adjournment on Saturday, or at
a very early day, the gentleman from Jennings, nor any gentleman on this floor, is no
more anxious than I am, as much as I would like for many of the important
measures,that have passed the House and gone to the other end of the capitol, to
become laws; if we had made a fee and salary bill I would vote with the gentleman from
Jennings to adjourn on Saturday or even now, but believing that by Monday we can pass
a fee and salary bill, and believing that we had as well pass a resolution that we are
opposed to a fee and salary bill as to pass a resolution to adjourn on Saturday and
offer the amendment. The people are as much interested in the subject of fees and
salaries as any other subject before this House, and if gentlemen on this floor had
used as much judgment as they did zeal and made a fee bill that the Senate could have
acted upon instead of getting up a new one, we might now have a fee bill. I said when
that bill passed. this House it was so unjust that the Senate
Mr. ENGLISH moved that the resolution and amendment be postponed until Saturday at 2 o'clock p. m,
Mr. BRIGGS said the time ought not to be taken up by introducing and discussing resolutions to fix a time to adjourn. We ought to wait until necessary legislation required by the people is enacted, and when that is done we can resolve in half an hour to adjourn at a time fixed. As no bills under the constitution can be presented to the governor for his signature within two days of the end of the session, we should wait until the fee and salary bill and other bills absolutely required shall pass, and then fix the time two days thereafter to adjourn. We will do this within the next four or five days, and we can then return to our people with some degree of credit to ourselves and satisfaction to our constituents.
Mr. HESS said he thought our constituents would be satisfied if we went home at once. He thought all the important legislation required could be completed before 12 o'clock to-night, and the did not see any use of us staying here any longer.
Mr. WORKS said he had endeavored to be consistent upon this question of adjournment. He had voted against all of the resolutions fixing the time for adjournment in advance. This is a political measure,as much as anything that has been before the House. Every political caucus that is held is sure to be followed by this kind of bumcombe resolutions, introduced for the purpose of giving members of that party an opportunity to make a record to to please their constituents. What this House should do is to pass the important bills that are now before it, and those to be received from the Senate, and then it will be time enough to resolve to adjourn, and it should be done without delay. This resolution, if adopted, would prevent the passage of any bills after 12 o'clock to-night, and would cut off the most important legislation that has been before us. We should not hesitate to vote the proposition down.
Under the operation of the previous question the resolution and amendment was postponed, until 2 o'clock p. m. next Saturday, by yeas 54, nays 35.
Mr. MARCH, from the special committee thereon, returned the bill [S. 103] to authorize cities to contract, maintain and operate water works, etc., with amendments, and, when so amended, recommended its passage.
On the motion of Mr. TULLEY the amendments were considered engrossed, the bill read the third time and finally passed the House by yeas 60, nays 18.
Mr. CALDWELL called up his bill, [H. R. 671] appropriating $15,000 for the expenses of the special session, which was read the third time.
On the suggestion of Mr. OVERMEYER the amount was increased to $25,000 and then the bill passed by yeas 72, nays 4.
Mr. WILLARD called up the bill, [S. 426] to amend section 3 of an act concerning voluntary association and their perpetuity, so as there shall be no distinction on account of complexion, nativity or religious belief, as to charity bestowed on orphan children, etc., which was read the third time and passed the House by yeas 71, nays 4.
On the motion of Mr. TULLEY the bill introduced this morning by Mr. Shutt [H. R. 689] to amend section 74 of the act to divide the State into judicial circuits, was taken up, the constitutional rule suspended--yeas 75, nays 2--the bill read the second time by title, read the third time by sections, and passed the House by yeas 74, nays 9.
The SPEAKER laid before the House the message from the Senate announcing the pas- sage of the bill [H. R. 486] for Congressional apportionment with amendments. The amend- ments being read-
On the motion of Mr. ENGLISH the Senate amendments were concurred in by yeas 57, nays 37, as follows:
Those voting in the affirmative were: Messrs. Alden, Allen,Baker, Blockley, Briggs, Brown of Jasper, Caldwell, Carter, Compton, Confer, Cunningham, Daily, Dalton, Davidson, Davis, Drake, Drover, Edwins, English, Faulkner, Fleming, Flodder, Galbraith, Garoutte, Ginz, Handy, Hart, Hosmer, Humphreys, Huthsteiner, Johnson, Kester, Lehman, Miers, Mitchell, Nave, Osborn of Elkhart, Osborn of Vermillion, Perry, Reichelderfer, Rooker, Saint, Scholl, Schweitzer, Shauck, Shields, Shutt, Stucker, Taylor of Warrick, Thompson, Talley, Vanpelt, Van Valzah, Willard, Wimmer, Works, Speaker Cauthorn, H. S.--57.
Those voting in the negative were: Messrs. Arnold of Wabash, Bearss, Brown of Steuben, Campbell, Cary, Connaway, Conner, Copeland, Donnell, Fancher, Golden, Gordon, Harland, Herod, Hess, Hopkins, Hubbard, Kelly, Kirkpatrick, Lindley, Major, March, Messick, Overmeyer, Owen, Reed, Robeson, Robinson, Shanks, Skinner, Sleeth, Snoddy, Stevens, Taylor of Lagrange, Thornburg, Vawter, Watson--37.
Mr. HANDY called up his bill [H. R. 469] prohibiting the sale or transfer of any county order in the possession of any one who is indebted to the county for taxes, which was read the third time and passed the House by yeas 74,nays 9.
Mr. HART called up the bill [S. 313] to legalize sheriffs,' administrators,' guardians' and commissioners' sales in certain cases, etc.,. which was read the third time and passed the House by yeas 65, nays 17.
Mr. HEROD called up his bill [H. R. 568] supplemental to an act providing for a generals system of common schools in all cities of 50,000 or more inhabitants, and for the election of a board of school commissioners for such cities--to levy a tax of three cents on the $100 to build a public library building, which was read the third time and failed to pass the House by yeas 45, nays 37.
The House then took a recess until 2 o'clock,.
Mr. SAINT offered a resolution, authorizing the Speaker when the roll call is resumed for the calling up of bills by members, to commence with the last name calling up towards the first . He spoke in favor of this resolution, protesting against the unjustness and unfairness of commencing always with the letter A, by which rule himself and others with names low down in the alphabet have been unable to advance legislation in which their constituents are particularly interested.
Mr. HESS called up his bill [H. R. 587] to repeal an act amendatory of an act for the
in-[corporation]
Mr. HEROD again called up his bill H. R. 568 authorizing a city of 50,000 inhabitants or more to levy a tax of 3 cents on the $100 to build a public library, the bill having failed this morning to receive a constitutional majority, was again put upon its passage and finally passed by yeas 52, nays 28.
Mr. HOPKINS called up his bill [H. R. 436] to amend an act for the organization of county boards and to provide for the collection of money received by county commissioners without authority, which was read the third time and finally passed the House by yeas 79, nays 0.
Mr. HOSMER called up Mr. Briggs'bill [H. R. 672] to legalize the official acts of the board of trustees of the town of Merom, Sullivan county, which was read the third time and passed the House by yeas 74, nays 2.
Mr. HUBBARD called up Mr. Miers' bill [H. R. 105] to regulate the practice of denistry, which was read the third time and finally passed, the House by yeas 63, nays 16.
Mr. HUMPHREYS called up Mr. Davidson's bill [H. R. 203] to enable cities incorporated under the general laws of this State to aid in the construction of railroads, gravel roads, railroad machine shops, hydraulic and water companies and bridges, which was read the third time and failed to pass for want of a constitutional majority, by yeas 48, nays 29.
Mr. OSBORNE of Elkhart, for Mr. HUTHSTEINER, called up his bill, [H. R. 607] regulating the advertising of sheriffs' sales. It repeals the act authorizing the sheriff to advertise in a newspaper, and compel the posting up of printed notices instead.
Mr. BRIGGS was not in the interest of any newspaper, but he thought all sheriff's sales should be advertised in the county paper. He was opposed to the passage of this bill.
Mr. MARCH did not think the expense of publishing the sheriff's sales in newspapers was justifiable, and he Hoped the bill would pass.
Mr. EDWINS was opposed to the bill from the fact that advertisements put up on trees and fences by officers, generally do not last more than an hour or two, and he believed that advertisements where real estate was involved should be printed, in a paper of general circulation.
The bill failed to pass the House by yeas 35, nays 44.
Mr. VANVALZAH'S military bill [H. R. 688] was read the second time and referred to
the
Mr. JOHNSON called up Mr. Saint's bill [H. R. 562] to prevent persons using any device such as billard, pool, card or other gaming tables, concert saloons, etc., which was read the third time, and finally passed the House by yeas 51, nays 25--as follows.
Vote taken on the passage of Mr. Saint's bill [H. R. 562], called up by Mr. Johnson:
Those voting in the affirmative were Messrs. Arnold of Wabash, Baker, Bearss, Blockley, Brown of Jasper, Brown of Steuben, Caldwell, Campbell, Carter, Confer, Connaway, Connor, Dalton, Davidson, Davis, Donnell, Drover, Handy, Harland, Hess, Hopkins, Hubbard, Johnston, Kelly, Kirkpatrick, Lindley, March, Mitchell, Osborn of Elkhart, Osborn of Vermillion, Overmeyer, Owen, Reed, Robeson, Rodman, Robinson, Rooker, Saint, Shanks, Shauck, Skinner, Snoddy, Stevens, Taylor of LaGrange, Taylor of Warrick, Thornburg, Tulley, Vanpelt, Vawter, Watson, Wimmer. Total, 51.
Those voting in the negative were Messrs. Alden, Briggs, Compton, Cunningham, Dailey, Drake, Edwins, Faulkner, Fleming, Flodder, Galbraith, Garroutte, Ginz, Hosmer, Kester, Lehman, Messick, Nave, Perry, Reichelderfer, Schweitzer, Taylor of Davis, Van Valzah, Willard, Speaker Cauthorn. Total, 25.
Mr. KELLEY called up his bill [H. R. 503] regulating loans of congressional township school funds. He said this bill requires county auditors, in making loans of we congressional township school fund, where the sum loaned is made up of amounts from different townships, to describe each fund in one mortgage instead of executing a separate mortgage for each fund, as is now the practice, and thereby avoid unnecessary expense to the borrower without in the least interfering with the legal division of the funds, or in any way lessening the protection now offered by law.
The bill then passed the House by yeas 67, nays 4.
Mr. KESTER called up his bill [H. R. 605] regulating weights and measures, which was read the third time, and finally passed the House by yeas 55, nays 16.
The House then adjourned.
The minutes of yesterday's proceedings were not read.
Mr. REEVE offered the following:
Whereas, Repeated effort has demonstrated that an equitable and practicable fee and salary bill can not be enacted into a law under the present constitution, and can only be done by special enactments relating to different localities; and
Whereas,The proposed constitutional amendment now submitted to the electors of this State will, if adopted, admit of such legislation, and the power to prevent practical legislation on this subject is in their hands; and
Whereas, It is evident that this body can not agree upon a fee and salary law that will act fairly and equitably to the people and the officers throughout the State because of difference in judgment as to what can and what ought to be done; and
Whereas, Any change in the law now is likely to be followed by entire change two years hence, in view of the probable adoption of said constitutional amendment as to fees and salaries, under which confusion will follow likely to create more evils than any present change will cure; therefore,
Resolved, That the further consideration of bill No. 344, now pending;, and all other consideration of the subject of fees and salaries be indefinitely postponed.
Mr. REEVE said every attempt to amend the fee and salary act only makes more confusion. Any bill of this kind can not help but be an inequitable one. If the people want an equitable fee and salary bill let them ratify the proposed constitutional amendment, which will probably be done. If a fee and salary bill be passed this session the officers would hardly get used to it before it would be tore up two years hence. At that time another fee and salary bill will be enacted and there will be more confusion. He submitted in all candor that this subject ought to be postponed till after the people act on the proposed constitutional amendment.
Mr. SHIRK was not willing, after having spent so much time upon this subject, to indefinitely postpone it. He hoped this Legislature would go ahead and do the best that can be done with it.
Mr. BENZ was afraid if this Legislature goes home without a fee and salary bill, some members would take it so hard it would make them sick. [Laughter.] So he favored this motion.
Mr. MENZIES thought the way the Senate has been proceeding, reducing does not reduce. The whole symmetry of the bill has been destroyed.
Mr. SARNIGHAUSEN said the resolution expresses the same opinion he has long ago entertained.
Mr. SHAFFER thought it useless to waste more time on the fee and salary bill, as the disposition is such no agreement looks possible. In order to remove the disease the cause must be displaced.
On motion by Mr. SHIRK--yeas 37, nays 8--the resolution was laid on the table.
On motion by Mr. HART the Senate resumed the consideration of the Senate committee's amendments to the Fee and Salary bill [H. R. 344].
Mr. WOOLLEN moved to reconsider the vote of yesterday by which the section relative to the fees of county auditors was adopted.
Mr. KENT declared it utterly impossible to pass an equitable and just fee and salary bill under the present constitution. He opposed the opening up of this question as to auditor's fees again.
Mr. REEVE regarded it as injustice to the auditors of the largest counties to require the handling of the many papers and vouchers coming into their possession without compensation, as it was understood the object of this motion to be.
Mr. SARNIGHAUSEN reminded senators that the county auditor has to do more work without compensation than all the other county officials put together.
Mr. GARRIGUS insisted the section, as passed yesterday, is an increase in the fees of county auditors, to which he was unalterably opposed.
The motion to reconsider was agreed to by yeas 80, nays 12.
On motion by Mr. WILSON the vote of yesterday by which the proviso was stricken out, allowing no fee for filling assessment lists, appraisers returns, county orders redeemed, or any voucher or receipt, was reconsidered by yeas 32. nays 11.
On motion by Mr. COFFEY an amendment was adopted providing that when money is paid to the sheriff' without sale one half com- mission shall be allowed, as when sold on execution.
On motion by Mr. TRAYLOR, instead of lines 25 and 26 in the committee amendment, the following words were substituted: ''For serving each person on a subpoena or a summons, as required by law, 35 cents," and for each copy, when required, 25 cents.
Mr. KENT contended that sheriffs should be allowed 50 cents a day for boarding prisoners. He made a motion to that effect, which was rejected.
On motion by Mr. TRAYLOR, the fee for making a certificate of sale on execution or decrees,was increased from 50 cents to $1.
On motion by Mr. OLDS the following item was added: "For publishing delinquent list, 35 cents for each description."
Then came the recess for dinner.
The LIEUTENANT GOVERNOR made Messrs. Foster and Menzies a committee of conference on the part of the Senate on the disagreement between the two houses on the city water works bill [S. 103--Mr. Foster's].
Mr. REEVE offered an amendment which would prevent the officer being punished for any guilty act of a deputy, and making the deputy liable as an officer therefor.
It was rejected by yeas 22, nays 25.
Mr. VIEHE offered an amendment making the officer liable for five times the amount of illegal fees charged, with cost of suit, and accepted a proviso suggested by Mr. REEVE in these words: "No officer shall be liable for any unlawful sum charged or taken by his deputy unless he know of and refuse to correct the same, and such deputy shall be liable as an officer to prosecution for such taking."
Mr. SHAFFER offered an amendment making the per diem of county commissioners $3 for each day's attendance.
Mr. BURRELL moved to make the per diem $4.50. He said these men are custodians of the public funds in every county, and their services ought to be worth the sum he named.
Mr. WINTERBOTHAM regarded this office as the most important in the county, and contended county commissioners should be paid liberally.
Mr. SHAFFER did not believe there was one county commissioner in 25 who could make $3 a day on his farm.
The motion to increase the per diem was rejected, as was also the amendment.
Mr. REEVE and Mr. HARRIS moved to add to the last section these words: "If it be found necessary and so entered by record to employ any person to render any service as contemplated in this act as a public necessity, the contract for such employment shall be spread on record in said court. And for said services ; rendered the claimant shall file his account in said court 10 days before the beginning of the term, and any tax payer shall have the right to contest the claim."
Mr. HARRIS desired when the County Board makes a contract it should be placed on record, so any tax-payer may examine it. He referred to an employment made by the commissioners of this county, of his suggestion, which produced considerable dissatisfaction for want of some such satisfactory provision as this.
The motion to amend was agreed to
Mr. FOWLER moved to add an additional section in the following words:
"The mine inspector, in addition to the fees now allowed by law, shall receive the sum of $200 per annum, to be paid as the salary of other State officers are paid."
On motion by Mr. OLDS it was rejected by yeas 37, nays 9.
Mr. REEVE moved to reconsider the vote by which section 30 was adopted, in order that a clause may be inserted to punish officers for overcharging; otherwise the law of extortion is wiped out, and every public officer can charge any fee he may please.
Mr. BURRELL made an ineffectual motion yeas--12, nays 33--to lay this motion to reconsider on the table.
On motion by Mr. REEVE, section 30 was amended by reinstating before the amendment made this morning by Mr. Viehe these words: "deemed guilty of a misdemeanor, and on conviction thereof shall be fined in any sum. not exceeding $100."
Mr. SHIRK moved to reduce the pay of members of the General Assembly to $5 a day while in actual attendance--mileage five cents.
Mr. FOSTER offered a substitute, allowing as mileage, actual traveling expenses, and no more.
Mr. VIEHE came not here to reduce all fees I and salaries, but only to reduce where reduction was demanded; and no demand has come up for a reduction of the pay of assemblymen.
Mr. DICE early in the regular session introduced a bill for the reduction of pay of members; but it was indefinitely postponed, not withstanding the fact that members come up here pledged to a reduction of fees and salaries.
Mr. OLDS opposed a reduction in the pay of members of the General Assembly. On the contrary, although Ins time is about up, he would rather see an inc ease than a decrease. All attempts to reduce the salary he regarded as for buncombe, without desiring to impugn any one's motives.
Mr. TRUSLER insisted we should not fix an estimate upon our services; that estimate has already been placed on them by the people.
The substitute was rejected by yeas 29, nays 19.
The motion [Mr. Shirk's] was also rejected by yeas 35, nays 11.
Mr. BURRELL offered an additional section, "that no judge of any court in this State shall make any allowance to any officer or person named in this act except as in this act provided." It was agreed to.
Mr. REEVE moved to add a section allowing salaries to the trustees of the asylum for feeble minded children of $400 each, out of which they are to pay traveling expenses.
Mr. FOWLER opposed raising this salary two hundred or any other hundred dollars. Those gentlemen accepted the office at the salary provided in the law, and the way is open for them to resign if they can not serve at the compensation named in the statute.
Mr. WINTERBOTHAM predicted that would he one of the most disagreeable institutions in the State to manage, and he favored giving the trustees the increase proposed. The salary should not, be so low that only those living in the immediate neighborhood can accept of the positions.
Mr. SHIRK would not make any special opposition to the amendment. No objection was made to the sum named in the bid when it was on its passage. He preferred a larger sum but did not put it in for fear of endangering its passage. Inasmuch as is is not in the act is is better to let the salary stand as fixed heretofore.
The additional section was rejected by yeas 14, nays 33.
The report of the committee as amended was concurred in by yeas 85, nays 12.
The amendments were ordered engrossed.
Mr. HARRIS moved to take up the specific appropriation bill [H. R. 640.]
Mr. REEVE opposed the motion. This bill is usually very properly held back till the closing hours of the session that any items belonging therein may be included.
Mr. BURRELL moved as a substitute to take up the metropolitan bill [H. R. 295].
The substitute motion was rejected by yeas 15, nays 33.
Mr. REEVE declaring that at this late hour [5:30 p. m.] the Senate is in no condition to consider the specific appropriation bill, made an ineffectual motion--yeas 11, nays 36--to adjourn.
The specific appropriation bill [H. R. 640] was read the third time and passed the Senate by yeas 31, nays 15.
Pending the roll call--
Mr. SARNIGHAUSEN explained his negative vote, because of the appropriation of $62,000 to purchase the State fair grounds in the city of Indianapolis.
Mr. FOWLER, when his name was called, regretted being compelled to vote for this $62,000 appropriation for the State Fair-grounds, but rather than vote against the whole bill he would do so.
Mr. MENZIES, in explanation of his vote, said, believing the bill should fail rather than $62,000 of the people's money be wrongfully appropriated he should vote no.
Mr. OLDS, when his name was called, said he was anxious an appropriation bill should be passed, but disliked to have to include in the affirmative vote the authority to purchase the State Fair-grounds. He voted "aye."
The vote was announced as above, and so the bill passed the Senate.
Mr. HEFRON moved to take up the bill [H. R. 687] to authorize a temporary loan.
Mr. HARRIS thought this motion was sufficiently embraced in the State House bill.
Mr. MENZIES said it was due to the State officers that action be taken on this bill one way or the other without delay.
The motion was agreed to; and the bill H. R. 687 was read the first time.
Mr. HEFRON moved for a dispensation of the constitutional restriction that the bill may be read the second and third times now and put on its passage.
The motion was rejected by yeas 31, nays 12 for want of a constitutional majority.
Mr. LANGDON offered a concurrent resolution that this General Assembly adjourn without day on Monday, the 24th day of March, at 6 o'clock p.m. He moved its adoption, demanded the yeas and nays on that motion, and also demanded the previous question.
On motion by Mr HARRIS further proceedings under the call was dispensed with.
On demand of Mr. BURRELL a call of the Senate was ordered, and, being taken, discovered 46 members present and answering to their names.
The demand [Mr. Langdon's] for the previous question was seconded by yeas 32, nays 12.
The main question was ordered, and under the operation of the previous question the resolution was adopted by yeas 25, nays 16.
Pending the roll call--
Mr. FOWLER, in explanation of his vote, said he apprehended no member was more anxious to go home than he, but as the specific bill had but just been passed and the fee and salary bill is not completed here, he was unwilling to vote for this resolution now.
Mr. REEVE, when his name was called, said there was no member would be more personally hurt by staying here than he, but he thought it a dereliction of duty to go home without disposing of the calender. He thought it would be gross injustice to leave so many House bills and other important measures without action, and therefore voted no.
Mr. V1EHE, when his name was called, said he was extremely anxious to go home, but being satisfied it is impossible to present the fee and salary and specific appropriation bills to the governor in the time prescribed by the constitution and adjourn on Monday, he would have to vote "no."
Mr. WOOD, when his name was called, said it would not be treating the House right to adjourn with so few of its bills passed and so many on the Senate files, and he should vote "no," for that and other reasons already stated.
Mr. FOWLER, just as the vote was being announced, said: Understanding from the junior senator from Marion [Mr. Harris] that the treasurer of state has gone home with the opinion that he can get along without the loan bill being passed, he would change his vote from "no" to "aye."
The vote was announced as above, and so the resolution was adopted.
Mr. BURRELL moved to take up the bill [H. R. 671] appropriating $25,000 for the expenses of this special session of the General Assembly, pending which motion--
And then the Senate adjourned.
So much of the journal of yesterday's proceedings as related to the roll-call on the passage of the bill, H. R. 592, was read--when
Mr. CALDWELL said he was recorded as voting in the affirmative on the bill, [H. R. 562] to separate billiard, card, pool and other amusements from saloons where intoxicating liquors are sold, when the fact is he was not in the house, and he desired that the journal be corrected in that particular and that his name be stricken from the roll-call.
Mr. JOHNSON said if there was to be any trouble about the matter the vote on the bill should be taken again.
The SPEAKER suggested that the best way to get out of this difficulty would be to take another vote on the passage of the bill.
The journal was corrected by striking out the name of Mr. Caldwell from the affirmative vote by consent.
Mr. HUTHSTEINER, from the
Resolved, by the House of Representatives the Senate concurring, That the
attorney general, auditor of state, and a third person to be appointed by the
governor of the State, shall constitute a commission whose duty it shall be to
prepare and present to the next General Assembly of the State a bill for an act
embracing a codification of the insurance laws of this State, so amended and with
such additional sections and provisions as will, when passed upon, provide an
insurance law which. will properly regulate the business of foreign and domestic
insurance companies doing business in the state, and provide for a proper
collection and accounting of all moneys due from such companies, and embrace such
other matter as, in the opinion of said commission, will be necessary to frame a
good insurance law. The person to be appointed by the governor, as a member of
said commission, shall be allowed such compensation for his services as may be
determined upon and certified to by the attorney-general, the auditor and governor
of the I state; provided such compensation shall not I exceed the sum of $200. The
auditor of state is
Mr. WATSON called up his bill, [H. R. 623] to legalize the sale and conveyance of certain real estate in Randolph county, which was read the third time and passed the House by yeas 71, nays 1.
Mr. KIRKPATRICK called up his bill [H. R. 597] to encourage the building of free gravel roads, which was read the third time.
Mr. WATSON regarded this bill as looking in the right direction. If this bill be passed the older counties can afford and will buy up all the toll roads in the county and make them free.
Mr. HANDY said that in his county they had paid road tax enough to gravel two-thirds of the roads in the county, and he thought some law of this kind should be passed.
Mr. WORKS said if we wanted to buy these turnpikes, this was not the time to do it, and because this bill imposes a tax upon the people to buy these toll roads he was opposed to it. The bill then failed to pass by yeas 40, nays 47.
Mr. LEHMAN called up his bill [H. R. 477] defining burglary, which was read the third time, and finally passed the House by yeas 86, nays 0.
On the motion of Mr. ALLEN, of Putnam, the vote on the rejection of the claim of Mr. Albert Moody for $325 was reconsidered.
On the motion of Mr. OVERMEYER the claim was referred to the
Mr. TAYLOR, of Daviess, moved to reconsider the vote by which the bill [S. 207] providing for determining, allowing and paying of claims against the State, etc., failed to pass the House of Representatives.
On the motion of Mr. COPELAND the motion to reconsider was laid on the table by yeas 64, nays 28.
The bill [S. 429] to legalize the election held in the year 1878, in the town of Washington, Daviess county, was read the first time and passed to the second reading. The House refused to concur in the Senate amendments to the House amendments to the bill [S. 103] to authorize cities to contract, maintain and operate water works.
On the motion of Mr. SLEETH a committee of conference was ordered and the Speaker appointed Messrs. Sleeth and Fleming as such committee on the part of the House of Representatives.
Mr. HOPKINS called up Mr. Davidson's bill [H. R. 203] to enable cities to aid in the construction of railroads, etc.; which failed to pass the House on yesterday for want of a constitutional majority. It was finally passed the House by yeas 56, nays 31.
Mr. LINDLEY called up his bill [H. R. 471] to enable the owners of wetlands to drain and reclaim them when the same can not be done without affecting the lands of others, which was read the third time and passed the House by--yeas 72, nays 9.
The House then took a recess until 2 o'clock p. m.
On the motion of Mr. CALDWELL the bill [S. 197] to protect the ballot box was taken from the table and placed upon the calendar.
Mr. MAJOR called up the bill [S. 122 ] to provide for the repairs of free turnpike roads in the various counties of this State, which was read the third time.
Mr. SHANKS said the gravel roads now made need the passage of this bill to make them good roads and to guarantee the work needed until the road-bed is settled.
Mr. HESS said the law now authorizing the construction of gravel roads does not provide for the keeping in repair of these roads, and he knew of no other way than the way provided in the bill. He was in favor of its passage.
The bill then passed the House by yeas 64, nays 13.
Mr. MARCH called up his bill [H. R. 464] to amend sections 2 and 3 of the act defining who are of unsound mind, which was read the third time, and passed the House by yeas 74, nays 3.
Mr. MESSICK called up Mr. Herod's bill [H. R. 658] to amend an act authorizing insurance companies to reinsure their risks and close up their business, which was read the third time, and failed to pass for want of a constitutional majority--yeas 48, nays 38.
Mr. MIERS called up his bill [H. R. 107] to amend section 70 of an act to provide for the election of justices of the peace, which was read the third time, and finally passed the House by yeas 71, nays 11.
Mr. MITCHELL called up his bill [H. R. 312] authorizing the Governor to deposit, with the Adjutant General, papers and reports upon the Morgan raid claims, and to authorize a seal for the Adjutant General, which was read the third time.
Mr. OVERMEYER said his constituents' were interested in this bill. If we should pass this bill any one having a claim filed with the Adjutant General would have to pay him a fee before they could get possession of it. This Assembly had passed a concurrent resolution, which was deposited with the Governor on the 7th day of March, 1879, authorizing him to hand over to the proper person or his attorney any of those papers to which they are entitled. If you will leave these claims where they now are parties can get these papers without paying a fee for them.
The bill failed to pass the House by--yeas 32, nays 49.
Mr. OSBORNE. of Elkhart, called up his bill [H. R. 647] to protect the purity of the ballot box, which was read the third time.
Mr. WILLARD said the title of the bill was the best part of it. There were the same provisions in this bill that the House had decided against some days ago. So far as the purchasing of votes is concered, we were sufficiently protected now. The trouble was that the law was not enforced. He was also opposed to the clause that would compel the printing of the name of the party ticket at the head. He hoped the bill would not pass.
Mr. OSBORNE, of Elkhart, said the bill provides that when the party name is printed, at. the head of the ticket, the ticket should not have any other name thereon than members of that party. It was to prevent deception and fraud.
Mr. SLEETH thought it was very much such a bill as was passed upon a few days ago. He was here to say that every man should have the right to vote for whom he pleased. If the election board can determine the intention of the voter, that intention should be carried out.
The bill then failed to pass the House by yeas 34, nays 54.
Mr. NAVE called up Mr. Overmeyer's bill [H. R. 331] limiting taxation by township and school trustees not to exceed 10 cents on the $100 for special school,which was read the third' time.
On the motion of Mr. OVERMEYER, the bill was recommitted to a special committee of three with instructions to insert such amendments as he read and submitted,
The SPEAKER (Mr. Humphreys in the
The committee by Mr. OVERMEYER reported immediately that they had complied with the instruction of the House and recommended the passage of the bill.
The report was concurred in and the bill finally passed the House by yeas 63, nays 10.
Mr. OVERMEYER offered an amendment to the title and said he supposed the title was amended by consent.
The SPEAKER. (Mr. Humphreys in the chair.) I have so ordered it, and you can not go back on that. [Laughter.]
Mr. MESSICK called again for a vote on the bill [H. R. 658] concerning insurance companies, which failed this morning for want of a constitutional majority, and it finally passed the House by yeas 56, nays 23.
Mr. OSBORNE, of Vermillion, called up Mr. Fancher's bill [H. R. 418] to amend section 28 of the common school law, which was read a third time.
Mr. ALLEN, of Putnam, thought the provision in the bill allowing the patrons of the school to select the teacher was a good one, and he was in favor of this provision.
Mr. EDWINS said there was nothing in the bill but what every fair-minded man could subscribe to. The law simply proposed that the trustees could not employ a teacher in the face of a majority of the patrons of the school, and he therefore favored the passage of the bill.
Mr. THAYER said that the teacher selected by a majority of the patrons should have no more pay than if he were selected by the trustees. He hoped the present law would not be changed, and he opposed the passage of this bill.
Mr. BAKER and Mr. M1TCHELL were opposed to the passage of the bill.
Mr. REED looked upon this bill as a step backwards. A majority of the patrons can under the present law say who shall not teach their school, and as a whole the bill was a bad one, and should not pass.
Mr. FANCHER moved that the bill be referred to a special committee of three, with instructions to amend, and report in the morning.
The motion was agreed to,and the SPEAKER made the committee to consist of Messrs. Fancher, Allen and Baker.
Mr. OVERMEYER, at the request of Mr. Stevens, called up the bill [S. 21] to establish city courts in cities having a population of 6,000 inhabitants, which was read the third time.
Mr. ENGLISH moved that the bill be indefinitely postponed.
Under the operations of the previous question the motion was agreed to by yeas 54, nays 38.
And then the House adjourned.
On motion by Mr. DAVENPORT the reading of the minutes of yesterday's proceedings were dispensed with and the bill [H. R. 114] to legalize certain building, loan and saving institutions was read the second time, the constitutional restrictions dispensed with, the bill read the third time and passed the Senate by yeas 41, nays 0.
On motion by Mr. CADWALLADER the bill [H. R. 623] to legalize the sale and conveyance of certain real estate by the Randolph County Auditor, was read the first, second and third times, under a dispensation, and finally passed by yeas 40, nays 0.
On motion by Mr. TRAYLOR the bill [H. R. 168] to authorize cities and towns to issue bonds for the purpose of funding their indebtedness--so as to reduce the rate interest on existing obligations, was read the second and third time, under a suspension of the constitutional provision, and passed the Senate by yeas 43, nays 0.
Mr. HARRIS, stating the agreement was not such as he desired, but feeling like the merits of his bill are such that it. ought not to be defeated, he moved to concur in a conference report now submitted by himself on his bill [S. 158] to remove all legal disabilities of married women, which report recommends the adoption of a new section, viz: "A married woman shall not mortgage or in any manner encumber her separate property acquired by descent, device or gift, as a security for the debts or liability of her husband or any other person."
Mr. TAYLOR opposed concurrence in the report because it, would compel a married woman to join her husband and sell her real estate outright in order to raise money for any necessary purpose. A law that will compel a person to do an illegal act in order to accomplish something that is right, is not a good law; in other words, if a married woman desires to borrow a sum of money at a reasonable rate of interest, for any special need--to cancel a mortgage on the family home, for instance she would have to do it under this bill by an indirect proceeding. She would have to join her husband in a deed to a third party, the third party to convey it back to the husband., and then that husband has the right to do with it just as he pleases.
Mr. MENZIES admitted the full force of this argument, and stated that the conference committee, on the part. of the Senate, contended for the position assumed by the senator from Dubois [Mr. Traylor]. The object of the bill is not only to disenthral women from legal disabilities, but it offers additional protection to the business community ; and recognizing the fact that there is a demand all over the State for legislation on the subject, and not wishing to lose the main features of the bill--regarding them as permanent to the amendment--the committee agreed to the House amendment.
Mr. HARRIS had taken great interest ill this measure, and it was with great reluctance, as a member of the conference committee, that he had consented to this amendment, The opposition to it, however, is based principally on technical grounds, as he did not think it is in reality very greatly objectionable and why? Because, if a woman owning real property wants to help her husband to money, she mortgages her realty; while, if this amendment shall become a law, she will simply join her husband in conveying it to a third party. He believed it far better that this amendment should be adopted than the entire bill, which he hoped the majority of the Senate thinks is rigtt, should fail to pass.
Mr. OLDS believed the bill, if enacted a law, would allow worthless husbands to squander the property which their wives acquired by inheritance. He believed the present law, as construed by the supreme court, to be right. If a contractor is not able to hold his own in a contract with a married woman, the General Assembly ought not to legislate in his favor as against the married woman, and for the benefit of the contractor. He opposed concurrence in the committee report.
Mr. REEVE said this question of advancing woman's rights has gone too far to be
laughed down. As to her separate property and her earnings, she should be as a femme
sole. As to the disposition of her real property, her hus-[band]
Mr. GRUBBS was unalterably opposed to this amendment, but, favoring the principle in the bill, and being unwilling to sacrifice the good in it on account of this objectionable clause, he favored concurrence.
The report was concurred in by yeas 31, 15.
0n motion by Mr. WOOD, the bill [H. R. 620] to provide for a general system of common
schools--by far the longest bill of either session--about one inch or more in thickness
of foolscap paper--being a codification of all the laws on the subject--was taken up,
and read the first time (in probably less than one minute by the watch.) and referred to
the
On motion by Mr. BURRELL, the bill [H. R. 671] to appropriate $25,000 for the expenses of this special session, was read the first time,and under a constitutional suspension, read the second time, by the title only, amended so as to make the sum $35,000, read the third time and passed by yeas 41, nays 4.
Mr. MENZIES offered a resolution, which was rejected by yeas 21, nays 24, to change the order of business so that the roll may be called and each member have the privilege, when his name is called, of presenting a measure for the action of the Senate.
On motion by Mr. GRUBBS, the bill [H. R 656] prescribing certain duties of auditor of State--he shall pay in the State treasury 75 per cent. of all fees collected, on account of services rendered in the insurance and law departments, was read three times, under a dispensation, and finally passed by yeas 40, nays 0.
On motion of Mr. LANGDON the House fee and salary bill [H. R. 344] as amended by the Senate substitute therefor, was read the third time, and passed by yeas 33, nays 15--as follows:
Yeas--Cadwallader, Comstock, Davenport, Davis, Foster, Grubbs, Hart, Hefron, Kahlo, Kramer, Langdon, Major, Mercer, Moore, Olds, Peterson, Ragan, Reiley, Shirk, Smith, Streight, Tarlton, Taylor, Treat, Trusler, Urmston, Viehe, Weir, Wood, Woollen--33.
Nays--Benz, Briscoe, Burrell, Coffey, Dice, Donham, Garrigus, Leeper, Menzies, Poindexter, Reeves, Sarnighausen, Shaffer, Wilson, Winterbotham--15.
Pending the roll call--Mr. BENZ, in explanation of his vote, said: The bill would give the clerk in his county but $475 and the sheriff $350, and as he was not in favor of cutting the throats of his county officers he could not sup- port this bill, therefore he voted "no."
Mr. REEVE, when his name was called, reminded the Senate that from first to last he had insisted the remedy for the evils desired to be corrected by a bill of this kind is in the hands of the people, and can only be accomplished by their adopting the constitutional amendment authorizing special legislation on the subject of fees and salaries. To disturb the present law would bring confusion upon the county officers, and then two years hence the law would be torn up again; and so, regarding this as an element of evil, he voted "no."
Mr. SARNIGHAUSEN, in explanation of his vote when his name was called, said: When he introduced the proposed constitutional amendment in relation to fees and salaries two years ago he was of opinion, as now, that there never could be framed a good fee and salary bill, doing justice to officers and giving satisfaction to the people, as long as the present constitutional provision is in force--as long as there has to be the same fees and salaries taxed in the larger as in the smaller counties. We passed a fee and salary bill in 1871 and repealed it in 1873. We passed another in 1873 and repealed it in 1875. That was amended in 1877, and now the present, law will be repealed, and this bill which is now being enacted will be again repealed in 1881. He could see no use in tampering with the present law, and for these reasons voted "no."
Mr. SHAFFER, when his name was called, in explanation of his vote, said he voted for the proposed constitutional amendment in the hope it would be ratified by the people before this Legislature would adjourn, so that a fee and salary bill could be passed that would do justice to every county in the State. That not being the case, and considering that this bill would operate unequally and unjustly in the different counties of the State he could not give it support, and therefore voted "no."
Mr. WOOLLEN, in explanation, when his name was called, said: Knowing this bill cuts county auditors, something less than 20 per cent., excepting in counties above 20,000, and believing the sheriffs' and clerks' fees are reduced about 15 per cent., which is just what ought to be done, and knowing that nearly all of us faithfully promised the people to do something looking to a reduction of fees and salaries, irrespective of the proposed constitutional amendment, he felt it not only incumbent upon him but a great pleasure to vote "aye "
Mr. COFFEY, being called on to vote after the roll call was completed, said: Believing that this Legislature ought not to pass a fee and salary bill; believing it better to postpone legislation upon this question until the proposed constitutional amendment upon this subject is submitted to the people for action thereon; believing the constitutional amendment will be ratified by the people; and further, believing that under our present constitution it is impossible to make a the bill which will be just and fair in its operations in all the counties throughout the State; and believing this bill is unjust and unfair in its provisions, he therefore voted "no."
The result was then announced as above, seconded, and so the fee and salary bill passed the Senate.
Mr. FOSTER, from the
Then came the recess till 2 o'clock.
On motion of Mr. VIEHE, his bill [S. 195] to provide for the redemption of real estate sold on execution, and to provide for deeds of conveyance in such cases, was read, as was also a majority and minority report recommending the adoption of a substitute.
Mr. REEVE moved to concur in the minority report, and proceeded to picture the superior provisions of the substitute over the original bill. This is one of the most important bills of the session. The law on this subject probably affects more property in the State adversely than any other law in force on the statute book.
Mr. VIEHE desired to answer some objections to his original bill, the provisions of which are mostly taken from the laws of New York and Illinois; and also to point out some defects in the substitute.
Mr. HARRIS said it was apparent some amendment ought to be made to the present redemption law, which evidently was made to cover some special cases; and like such kind of legislation, after serving its purpose, is usually not of much value.
The minority report was rejected.
Mr. COMSTOCK offered an amendment to the majority report, to apply where the rental value exceeds a $100 a year, providing for the appointment of a receiver where the party in possession is not responsible, etc.
Mr. VIEHE opposed the amendment, thinking it would so load down the bill that its consideration might as well be stopped if the amendment be adopted.
Mr. LANGDON also opposed this amendment. This is no time for so stringent a law--and one which would oppress those least able to bear up under its operations.
The amendment was rejected.
Mr. REEVE moved to amend so that each person redeeming shall be subrogated to all the rights of the original judgment plaintiff, &c.
Mr. VIEHE insisted tins amendment would destroy the harmony and consistency of the bill.
Mr. REEVE contended that his amendment did not interfere with the harmony or symmetry of the bill.
The amendment was rejected.
Mr. BRISCOE moved to extend the time of redemption from one to two years.
Mr. VIEHE objected.
The motion was lost.
On Mr. MENZIES' motion a proviso was added to section 3, "that nothing herein shall apply to any mortgagee or junior judgment 'creditor not made a party to the proceedings under which, the property was sold."
On motion of Mr. HARRIS, under the operations of the previous question demanded by him, the bill was considered as engrossed, read the third time, and passed the Senate by yeas 38, nays 3.
On motion by Mr. HEFRON the bill [H. R. 464] relating to warehouse receipts, etc., was read the first time and under a dispensation the second (by title only) and third times, and finally passed by yeas 41, nays 1.
On motion, by Mr. MAJOR the bill [H. R. 22] to provide for exempting property from attachment and sale on execution in certain cases, was taken up.
Mr. OLDS preferred a homestead act, but at this stage of the session he was willing to take this bill, as it is probably the only one that can be got through.
Mr. REEVE referred to the pending question at the time the bill was laid before the Senate, (See these reports of March 10, p. m ) being on the substitute exempting a homestead of 40 acres.
Mr. HEFRON regarded the substitute as manifestly unjust, and made a few remarks in opposition thereto. When he had concluded--
The Senate adjourned.
Prayer service by the Rev. F. M. Role, of the Rochester M. E. church.
The reading of the journal was omitted.
Mr. FAULKNER introduced a bill [H. R. 697] designating what counties shall constitute the fifth, sixth and seventh judicial circuits, which was read the first time and passed to the second reading.
Mr. JOHNSON, in offering the minority report on his bill [H. R. 601] to prohibit the keeping of saloons, etc., said owing to the unprecedented and unparliamentary action of the gentleman temporarily in the chair, he was placed in rather an awkward position. It has been the parliamentary rule, when a bill was referred to a select committee, to put it in the hands of its friends for perfection. But in this case the majority of the committee were the enemies of the bill.
Mr. LEHMAN presented a majority report, setting forth at some length its reasons for the conclusions which it arrived at, viz.: that the bill lie on the table. Signed by Messrs. Lehman, Briggs and Taylor, of Daviess.
The minority report was read, striking out all after the enacting clause, and inserting new matter.
Mr. JOHNSON hoped the House would vote direct upon the adoption of the minority report. He had drafted the bill in good faith for the benefit of the people.
Mr. LEHMAN believed every member had his mind made up as to how he would vote upon the question. He was opposed to the adoption of the minority report, and claimed that the present, while perhaps not a perfect law, was the best we could get now, and should not be changed. If this bill becomes a law he though; it would take out of the school fund about $200,000 per annum, and would virtually make whisky free, and he was opposed to free whisky.
Mr. Allen, of Putnam, said: We have had free whisky license, local option and prohibition laws, and whisky has been drank all the same under the operation of these different laws. He believed oar present law was as good as any that had been tried, and as a rule, he found that it was best to let well enough alone. Therefore, he would oppose any effort to change it for a law that was doubtful and expensive. The present law brings a revenue for the benefit of our schools. He might be opposed to the education of his children with means derived from this source, and others might be; if so, let the money be used, as suggested in some of the bills introduced in this body, on the public roads.
Mr. WATSON thought this was a proper law and embodied the principles he had long cherished, and he hoped, the bill would pass.
Mr. MIERS would vote for a bill that would make it criminally wrong to sell his neighbor whisky. But to simply declare a saloon a nuisance, it was too mild a form to suit him.
Mr. JOHNSON said a large proportion of the expense of paupers, criminal prosecutions, etc., resulted from the fact that money earned by hard labor was too frequently spent for liquor by the head of the family on his way home with his week's wages in his pocket. He submitted in support of this statement the following figures:
Number of saloons in the State, 2,306; number of convicts, 1,126. In the counties of Marion, Vanderburg, Allen and Vigo, there were 895 saloons and 410 convicts, while in Hendricks, Henry, Randolph and Monroe counties, there are no saloons and but 32 convicts.
Mr. CALDWELL demanded the previous question, and under its operations the minority report was rejected by yeas 44, nays 48.
Pending the roll call--Mr. BRIGGS, in explanation, said he was opposed to this bill for
the reason that under it any person could sell liquor as he pleased so he did not allow
it to be drank on his premises. He could peddle it about the country in a wagon and sell
it by drink or quart without liability, if he did not sell any to minors. Besides this
it will take
Mr. CAMPBELL, when his name was called, in explanation said: Believing this bill to be in the interest of good morals he voted "aye."
The majority report was then adopted and the bill was laid on the table.
Majority and minority reports upon the bill [H. R. 982] regulating the sale of intoxicating liquors--local option--were submitted, the former recommending laying the bill on the table, and the latter recommending its passage.
Mr. MARCH said: This bill gives communities, which are powerless under the existing law to protect themselves, the right and power to exclude saloons from their limits, when they don't, want them. When men once close their eyes to so monstrous an evil, and steel their hearts against the urgent appeals of all the better class of society, such are never wanting in expedients to justify them for indorsing a traffic that not only their judgment, but every honest and decent impulse of their nature tells them is wrong. He a demanded support of this bill on the very principle of self-government, the right of the people to regulate and control their own affairs--not only a cardinal, but a much boasted article of faith of the Democratic party--if not of all others.
Whenever a bill is offered to protect society from a traffic that robs thousands of innocent women and children of the bread of life; of that which a natural appetite craves and ought to have--then comes the cry of sumptuary laws. Is it any infraction of the principle of free government to curb the appetite of whisky-drinkers, it thereby we can supply a greater number of more worthy people with the food that natural appetite craves? Our rule is, the greatest good to the greatest number. We believe a man had better take the 30 cents a day he spends for drink, and buy a few oranges, a spring chicken, or some little luxury for his sick wife; or hire a wash girl to help the mother of his children in her arduous duties, than spend it for that which injures him. There are more fights--neighborhood quarrels--more crimes and murders in one year a whisky community, where saloons are plenty, than in 10 years where the people are temperate. Take, for example, the town of Newcastle, Henry county, where for 30 years there was no saloon, seldom a tight, no court expenses to speak of, not enough poverty hardly to keep that excellent virtue we call charity, in healthy existence; but but since they have got saloons they have had three murders in as many years.
Mr. LEHMAN said as he believed that local option meant local fights and feuds, he therefore moved to lay the bill and reports on the table.
The motion to lay on the table was rejected yeas--46, nays 49.
The minority report was then adopted by yeas 48, nays 47, as follows:
Those voting in the affirmative were Messrs. Arnold of Blackford, Arnold of Wabash, Baker, Bearss, Brown of Steuben, Campbell, Garey, Carter, Connaway, Connor, Copeland, Davis, Donnell, Fancher, Golden, Gordon, Handy, Harland, Hess, Hopkins, Hubbard, Johnston, Kelly, Kirkpatrick, Lindley, Major, March, Mitchell, Osborn of Elkhart, Osborn of Vermillion, Overmeyer, Owen, Reed, Robeson, Rodman, Robinson, Saint, Shanks, Skinner, Snoddy, Stevens, Taylor of Lagrange, Taylor of Warrick, Thayer, Thornburg, Vawter, Watson, Works--48.
Those voting in the negative were Messrs. Alden, Allen, Barker, Blockley, Brown of Jasper, Bryant, Caldwell, Confer, Copeland, Daily, Dalton, Davidson, Drake, Drover, Edwins. English, Faulkner, Fleming, Flodder, Galbraith, Garroutte, Ginz, Hart, Herod, Hosmer, Humphreys, Huthsteiner, Lester, Lehman, Messick, Nave, Perry, Reichelderfer, Rooker, Schweitzer, Shauck, Shields, Shutt, Stucker, Taylor of Daviess, Thompson, Vanpelt, Van Valzah, Willard, Wimmer, Speaker Cauthorn, H. S.--47.
So the minority report was adopted.
Mr. FLEMING submitted the report of the conference committee on the bill [S. 103] to authorize the construction of water works. (See Senate reports to day noon.) The report was concurred in.
The House then proceeded to the consideration of the Senate amendments to the specific appropriation bill and refused to concur in the first Senate amendment striking out of the original bill an appropriation of $25,000 for furnishing the new building for the insane.; and also the Senate' addition to the second item of $40,000 for furnishing the same.
The House also refused to concur in the items appropriating $12,000 for improvements in the Institution for the Deaf and Dumb,and the item of $94,000 to complete the new Insane Hospital.
The item appropriating $62,000 for the purchase of the Indiana State Fair Ground being read--
Mr. HUBBARD doubted the propriety of sending out $62,000 now to save the $25,000 loaned to the society some years ago, and was unwilling to concur in this amendment.
Mr. SHANKS favored this appropriation of $62,000 to pay the first mortgage on the State agricultural fair grounds. The society owns 36 acres of ground in the city of Indianapolis, with buildings that cost the society over $l25,000, the land itself being worth more than this proposed appropriation. There is a prior lien of $60,000, with $2,000 interest. Subsequent to this is a lien of the State for $25,000 on the same ground. The society can not meet its interests the first of which falls due in April, 1879. The debt is open to suit when the interest falls due and is unpaid. Thus the property may be lost to the society and to the State before another Legislature meets. Our manufacturing interests are in their infancy, but they will be the better sustained as the agricultural interests are fostered.
Mr. Willard said that this appropriation was not truly an appropriation but an investment, and regarding it in that light it is better to make the appropriation than to let the State fair go down. It is a good investment as a business proposition, for it gives if $162,000 for property worth $120,000. Other States have their State fairs, and for the great State of Indiana to step backward in this matter would be a shame to this Legislature. All other interests have had protection. We have had legalizing bills by the dozen; we have had medical bills and mining bills; but now that the farmers of this State demand something at our hands men rise against it. He trusted, in behalf of the agricultural and mechanical interests of this State, that this appropriation would be made.
Mr. HANDY claimed to represent one of the finest agricultural count es in the State,
and insisted that it is a duty, recognized by surrounding States, to foster annual
agricultural exhibitions. He referred to the history of the State Board of Agriculture
in the past, and to its proposition to make to the State, for $62,000, a deed to the
exposition grounds of 36 acres,. the costly buildings thereon and in addition, all its
other property, including about three acres of unincumbered land lying in the city of
Indianapolis, with perhaps $5,000 or $6,000. Now this institution comes to this
Legislature
Mr. WORKS made a few remarks in opposition to the purchase of the Fair Grounds by the State.
Mr. CUNNINGHAM: I would not say one word or cast one vote in opposition to the farming and laboring classes of the great State of Indiana. But he was opposed to this reckless and extravagant expenditure of the people's money under the pretext of protecting the "sacred interests" of the farming community. He was reared on a farm, and still follows that noble and much exalted business. Those he represents were not demanding that this $62,000 of the hard earnings of the people shall be invested in any obscure enterprise like the one under consideration. He was bitterly opposed to this wasteful expenditure, and the people who toil from early morn till late at night do not demand that we should waste their hard earnings in the manner proposed by the Senate amendment.
The House took a recess till 2 o'clock.
Messrs. HEED, CONNER, THAYER, HESS, TAYLOR, of Daviess, SAINT, BAKKER, and CALDWELL, spoke in favor of the proposition to purchase he State Fair grounds.
Mr. OSBORNE, of Elkhart, wanted to consider the question in the light of public policy. The extreme limit; of the valuation of this property according to appraisement of resident citizens was but $80,000. He asserted that the State could better subserve the agricultural interests by appropriating a sum of money year after year to enlarge the premiums. The State of Michigan and other States had appropriated $25,000, $30,000 or even $40,000 per annum to enlarge the premiums; and it was also customary for these States to hold their State fairs in different parts of the State. Nearly every county had fair grounds ample to accommodate the State fair, and in this way materially encouraged the agricultural interests in different portions of the State. He would not cut off these agricultural associations, but thought the agricultural interests of the State could be better subserved by following the example of these States than to appropriate this amount of money, and tie it up in the purchase of real estate, and at a price too so far above its true value. Then the central part of the State ought not to have the entire benefit of tins money.
The House adopted amendments to this item, that no pan of the $62,000 shall be paid unless an absolute title fee from all liens be vested in the State; and that the State Board shall have free use of the grounds for annual fairs till otherwise ordered, conditioned on keeping the grounds and buildings in good condition.
Mr. DAILEY moved to strike out $62,000 and insert $9,000 or so much as was needed to pay the interest on the indebtedness and to protect the interest of the State.
Mr. MIERS demanded the previous question,and under its operations the amendment was rejected by yeas 43, nays 45.
The Senate amendment as amended by the House was then concurred in by yeas 49, nays 39.
The item appropriating $873 59 for balance on the iron fence at the Indiana Reformatory for Women and Girls was rejected by yeas 31, nays 46.
The House also refused to concur in the appropriation of $2,000 for repairing and furnishing the Asylum for Feeble-Minded Children.
The item allowing $100 to James H. Rice for extra services as a committee clerk was also rejected.
The SPEAKER laid before the House the report of the committee of conference on the bill [S. 158] to remove legal disabilities of married women (see Senate reports this forenoon), which was concurred in.
The House adjourned.
On motion by Mr. VIEHE the senator from Jackson [Mr. Burrell] took the chair, the reading of the minutes was omitted, and the following described Rouse bills were [considered] read the first, time and referred to appropriate committees, except as otherwise stated:
The bills [H. R. 13] concerning petit jurors; [H. R. 32] felonies; [H. R. 105] dentistry: [H. R. 115] the Sabbath; [H. R. 642] Walton, Cass Co., placed on the calendar; [H. R. 120] libel; [H. R. 162] labor liens; [H. R. 188] fire insurance; [H. R. 173] justices' appeals; [H. R. 192] Butler, DeKalb Co.; [H. R. 263] fish law, placed on the calendar; [H. R. 202] liquor license; [H. R. 206] allowance to constables and marshals; [H. R. 207] supervisors; [H. R. 209] horse thief detectives; [H. R. 225] Canada thistle;[H. R. 238] general practice; [H. R. 273] sheriffs' and coroners' deeds; [H. R. 264] laboring men's levies; [H. R. 286] to abolish coroners' juries; [H. R. 288] to abolish railroad charges in the handling of grain; [H. R. 477] burglary and house breaking, placed on the calendar; [H. R. 290] running at large of animals; [H. R. 310] to allow an arrest in an adjoining county, placed on the calendar; [H. R. 351] justices'substitutes; [H. R. 367] justices; [H. R. 373] trespassing animals; [H. R. 368, 414, 420] for the relief of defaulting trustees were separately placed on the calendar; [H. R. 608] for the relief of a defaulting trustee; [H. R. 397] highways; [H. R. 412] general practice act; [H. R.419] Elwood, Madison county; [H. R. 636] county boards; [H. R. 456] a certain plank road; [H. R. 461], descents, placed on the calendar; [H. R. 469], county orders; [H. R. 473], errors in description of roads; [H. R. 482], for injury to trees; [H. R. 487], highway, placed on the calendar; [H. R. 488], general practice act; [H. R. 609], redemption of property of non-residents; [H. R. 529], re-appraisement and sale of lots mortgaged to school funds; [H. R. 530], malt liquors on fair grounds, placed on the calendar; [H. R. 540], highways; [H. R. 549], speedy trial of cases, placed on the calendar; [H. R. 565], Irvington town, placed on the calendar; [H. R. 383] Kokomo Gas company, placed on the calendar; [H. R. 203] city aid: [H. R. 582] education of colored children; [H. R. 568] Indianapolis library; [H. R 583] tax for gas; [H. R. 585] Fremont, Steuben county; placed on calendar; [H. R. 587] law associations, [H. R. 591] to amend sec. 8 of the divorce law; [H. R. 621] Kendallville; [H. R. 625] employes' lien; [H. R. 630] claims against any county; [H. R. 675] felony; [H. R. 676] tax on insurance companies; [H. R. 633] publication of acts (in 30 days after the adjournment): [H. R. 686] Vernon; [H. R. 295] for a metropolitan police in cities of 45,000 and more; on motion by Mr. HARRIS it was indefinitely postponed; [H. R. 687] for a State loan; [H. R. 335] taxation for township purposes; [H. R. 658] insurance companies, placed on the calendar; [H.R. 605] false weights; [H. R. 464] unsound mind; [H. R. 442] transfer of pupils; [H. R. 154, 284 and 471] for drainage laws;[H. R. 668] board of pardons; [H. R. 107] justices, and [H. R. 506] loans of school funds. The House concurrent resolution authorizing persons whose character has been brought in question before the Insane Hospital investigating committee to have a hearing before said committee by counsel, was adopted.
The House concurrent resolution to allow the clerk of the House $200 for indexing House journals being read.
Mr. HEFRON moved to amend by allowing the principal and assistant secretaries of the Senate $200 each.
On motion by Mr. HARRIS the resolution and amendment were referred to the
The House concurrent resolution authorizing the appointment of a commission to codify the insurance laws of this State, coming up--
Mr. REEVE moved to amend so the appointee shall be the local resident manager of some large foreign insurance company.
Mr. MENZIES opposed the amendment,
Mr. HARRIS hoped the resolution would pass as it came from the House; preferring if any change is made the appointee shall be a friend to Home rather than foreign Insurance companies. This plan of preparing legislation is the best ever devised, and the resolution looks in the right direction.
Mr. REEVE declared all legislation fostering
The amendment was rejected. The House resolution was adopted.
The House concurrent resolution for instruction and request to Indiana Congressmen to use their best efforts to procure an amendment to the law so that banking associations shall be subject to the regular rules of law In the courts, both State and national was adopted.
The House concurrent resolution directing a joint committee to examine and report what the State should pay to Marion county for use of gas, etc., at this session was adopted; and the presiding officer [Mr. Burrell] named the committee on finance as such committee on the part of the Senate.
Mr. REEVE introduced a bill [S. 458] to provide
for a revision of the laws of the State of Indiana, by a commission of five competent
lawyers, 10 be appointed by the judges of the supreme court; the codification to be
completed before the 1st day of September next, so as to be stereotyped under the
supervision of the printing bureau, strongly bound, and sold at the price of $30 or both
volumes. It was read the first time, and referred to the
On motion of Mr. TRUSLER, the bill [H. R. 589] to authorize the payment of indebtedness by a township in Union county was read the first time and placed on the calendar.
Mr. BENZ offered a joint resolution authorizing the governor to transfer all papers relating to the Morgan raid claims to the custody of the Adjutant General, who shall surrender to the owner any claim or evidence thereof on demand, which was read the first time.
The PRESIDING OFFICER (Mr. Burrell) announced the consideration of the Exemption bill [H. R. 22], the question being on the substitute pending at the time of the adjournment, on Saturday afternoon.
Mr. REEVE insisted, if his substitute was ejected, members will find out they have missed an opportunity to do the people of the State great service. If the homestead be limited in value there will be no effort to increase its value beyond that limit; but if a homestead unlimited in value is given, the effort will be to surround the home with all possible comforts and conveniences, and the result is it elevates the honor of the inmates; it stimulates them to accumulate taxable property, and all the higher elements and better motives are stimulated and cultivated. The State, instead of being studded with little homesteads held below a small value for fear they will be swept away, should present on every hand beautiful and cultivated residences whose inmates are constantly trying to still further beautify them. If such a homestead law be adopted it alone would relieve this Legislature of all its mistakes and from all its faults.
Mr. KENT believed the people of Indiana want a fair exemption law, but can not afford to have a homestead law. He was not sure but $1,000 is too much, though time may develop that is about the correct figure. The substitute would operate unjustly and unfairly especially in or near cities, where a man could bid defiance to his creditors and yet live like a prince.
Mr. HARRIS offered as a substitute for the whole subject matter, a bill similar to the bill S. 248--for a homestead of the value of $700 and personalty to the value of $300. This he believed to be the best that can be obtained at this session.
The Senate took a recess till 2 o'clock.
[On motion of Mr. WOOD the House amendments to the Wabash Canal land patent bill [S. 18] was concurred in.]
Mr. HEFRON preferred the exemption bill as it came from the House. If the purpose is to grant relief to men of small means who have families to support, an exemption law is far better, as he proceeded to show.
Mr. LANGDON: The public good is better subserved by exempting a certain portion of a man's earnings than by having it consumed by process of court, following upon financial misfortune. The public good is best subserved by having capital fixed in homesteads and in tools, which in the hands of labor, will produce wealth. He favored a homestead to a reasonable limit, and an exemption of the tools of the laborer.
Mr. TRAYLOR opposed the substitute: The people are not demanding such legislation, it is only advocated by a few persons; and instead of operating for the good of poor people, it will have the contrary effect.
Mr. KENT would vote against; the substitute, in the hope of getting something better.
Mr. URMSTON was in favor of a fair exemption, but did not believe a homestead law is demanded by the people.
Mr. REEVE regarding this substitute as class legislation, and contravening a constitutional provision requiring exemptions; protested against its adotpion.
The substitute [Mr. Harris'] was adopted by--yeas 27, nays 15. The bill as amended was react the third time.
Mr. REEVE contended this bill was in violation of section. 22 of the bill of rights. There is no authority to exempt anything but specific property, which the statute itself must describe, that there may be no inequality. Then this bill does not repeal the law now in force exempting $300.
Mr. HARRIS said it would not do to argue that a homestead law is unconstitutional, and made a few remarks in favor of his bill.
Mr. HART, being, a poor man's friend, and regarding this bill as unequal in its bearings, was opposed to it.
Mr. KENT desired an exemption larger than $300, and--
Mr. MAJOR said this is a measure in which he took a great deal of interest, but as this bill is unjust and unequal because it allows a man land worth $1,000, while a man with no land is allowed but $300, and thus it discriminates in favor of the strong against the weak; therefore he opposed it.
Mr. SHIRK desired a much more liberal homestead law passed, but believing this as good as can be obtained, would vote for it.
Mr. STREIGHT and Mr. WINTERBOTHAM also favored a liberal exemption and a liberal homestead law, but did not consider this bill either.
The bill passed by yeas 27, nays 17.
The bill [H. R. 5] to amend section 1 of the act regulating the number of grand jurors,was indefinitely postponed.
The bill [H. R. 11] to amend the act authorizing County Commissioners to construct gravel or other roads, was read the second time.
The bill [H. R. 17] to repeal the railroad aid act, with a majority report for indefinite postponement, and a minority report favoring its passage, being read--
Mr. SHAFFER favored indefinite postponement of this bill.
Mr. REEVE moved to amend the minority report by allowing promised aid to be voted.
Mr. SARNIGHAUSEN believing this railroad aid law, for the most part a swindle, has
long enough disgraced the statute book of Indiana,
Mr. STREIGHT referred to the fact that local indebetness was increasing at a fearful rate. He hoped the minority report would be concurred in.
Mr. BRISCOE referred to the fact there was no law compelling townships to aid railroads. If this law was repealed it would prevent two townships in his county from enjoying railroad advantages. He desired the law to remain as it, now stands.
Mr. KENT also spoke in favor of concurrence to the minority report. The people should have an opportunity to determine for themselves this matter.
Mr. WOOD was sure the standard railroads and not the tanners were asking a repeal of this aid law. He who votes in favor of its repeal votes in favor of a great and grand monopoly and against healthy competitions between railroads.
Mr. WINTERBOTHAM thought it strange when almost every town, township and county is embarrassed that senators will advocate the creation of further indebtedness to grind down the people. The greatest railroad center in the world--the city of Chicago--never voted a dollar in aid of any road running into it.
Mr. MENZIES regarded it as inexpedient to keep this law on the statute book, and spoke in favor of its repeal.
On motion by Mr. LANGDON the bill, reports and amendments, was referred to the
The LIEUTENANT GOVERNOR announced committees of conference on disagreements between the two Houses, to-wit: On the specific appropriation bill, Messrs. Cadwallader and Leeper: on the fee and salary bill, Messrs. Kent and Moore.
Mr. LANGDON objected to action on messages from the House before they are read and considered by the Senate.
The LIEUTENANT GOVERNOR also much preferred the regular parliamentary practice be adhered to.
On motion by Mr. BURRELL his bill [S. 427] concerning public warehouse receipts, was read the third time, and passed by yeas 35, nays 7.
The Senate adjourned.
The reading of the journal of Saturday's proceedings was dispensed with.
Speaker Cauthorne (Mr. Johnson in the chair) asked leave to amend the bill [H. R. 527] for the relief of John W. Strauss, by striking out all after the enacting clause and inserting new matter, which was agreed to, and the amendments ordered engrossed.
The bill [S. 18] to declare all land patents shall be received as evidence in court was read the third time.
Mr. DAILEY moved to amend, provided that nothing in this act shall be so construed as to affect the rights of any purchaser or owner of any portion of the class of lands described in this act.
The amendment was agreed to, and then the bill passed the House by yeas 55, nays 19.
The House then took up the order pending at adjournment on Saturday, being the consideration of the Senate amendments to the specific appropriation bill.
The House refused to concur in the item concerning the claim of Crane, Breed & Co., for $1,310.50, for work done in the Normal School building at Terre Haute. The House also refused to concur in the other Senate items.
Mr. WILLARD moved ineffectually to amend, by adding the sum of $1,974.12 to Ruben P. Main, for indebtedness made by State Prison South.
The claim of $10 for summoning witnesses for the committee visiting the Southern prison, was allowed.
Mr. VAN VALZAH moved to amend by adding $1,000 for the State Normal School, which was ruled out of order.
Mr. BRYANT called up his motion to reconsider the vote by which the House concurred in the Senate amendments appropriating $62,000.
Mr. DRAKE was in favor of a reconsideration. He was against appropriating so large an amount, but was willing to bridge over by paying up the Interest.
Mr. HUMPHREYS and Mr. LEHMAN said they would vote for the reconsideration with the understanding that an appropriation shall be made sufficient to protect the interest of the State until 1881.
The motion to reconsider was agreed to by yeas 59, nays 35.
Mr. MARCH, in explanation, said he had voted for this amendment, but believing that the money could be better appropriated, he voted "aye."
Mr. SAINT, in explanation of his vote, said he thought the interests of the State would suffer it not protected in this way, and he therefore voted "no."
Mr. OSBORNE of Elkhart moved to strike out the item appropriating the money to purchase the State fair grounds, and insert for the use of the State Board of agriculture $10,000, one moiety thereof to be paid on the 1st of June, 1879, and the other moiety on the 1st of June, 1880, and the Auditor of State is hereby instructed to draw his warrants for said amounts at said dates, to be paid out of any money in the treasury not otherwise appropriated.
Mr. WILLARD said it was just a question whether we should put $10,000 more to the $25,000 already appropriated, making $35,000. He was opposed to it.
Mr. JOHNSON If we intend to continue the State fairs we should protect these grounds. He thought, as a business transaction, the best thing the State could do would be to purchase this ground.
Mr. BRIGGS had been out to see this ground and had made inquires of competent judges as to the value, and found that $75,000 is all it is worth, and he understood that the interest of Eastern capitalists in this ground could be purchased to-day for $45,000. If we appropriate $10,000 to protect this ground for two years it is as much as we can afford to do.
Mr. STUCKER was opposed to appropriating $62,000 for the purchase of the State fair
grounds, and thought the State could not afford to engage in this kind of a speculation.
It was of no benefit to any person except the people of Indianapolis. If the property is
as valuable as is stated he is sure some speculators would have taken hold of it before
this time. He did not think the grounds would, bring $40,000 to-day, and he did not
believe the man could be found who would give the amount proposed by the Senate
amendment for the whole concern. The State had better lose the $25,000 already invested
than to spend twice the amount to save it. He thought the farming community of the State
would be benefited more by dividing this $62,000 among the different county agricultural
societies than by appropriating so large an amount in one spot. If we intend to
legislate in the interest of rings, the amendment is in the right direc-[tion]
The amendment was then agreed to by yeas 51, nays 29.
Mr. HEROD moved that the House reconsider the vote whereby they had refused to concur in the Senate amendments allowing $800 to the Bridge, Roof and Bolt company for an iron fence on the Female Reformatory grounds.
The motion was reconsidered, and the House refused again to concur in the Senate amendment.
Then come the recess until 2 o'clock p. m.
Mr. Speaker CAUTHORN (Mr. Miers in the chair) asked, and obtained leave to call up his bill [H. R.527] for the relief of sureties of Thos.F. Chamber, trustee of Werdner township, Knox county, which was read the third time, and finally passed the House by yeas 78, nays 1.
Mr. OVERMEYER called up the Senate concurrent resolution to adjourn at noon to-day, and moved to amend by making the final adjurnment at noon on Wednesday next.
Mr. 0SBORNE of Elkhart moved to amendment provided the specific appropriation bill and a fee and salary bill be enactment substantially reducing the fees and salaries of public officers.
Mr. ALLEN of Putnam moved ineffectually to lay the whole matter on the table--yeas 42, nays 45.
Pending the roll-call--
Mr. WIMMER when his name was called said: He was as anxious as any one to go home, but would be found voting "aye" on this question until the forty days had expired unless the General Assembly shall pass a bill reducing the fees and salaries of State and county officers.
Mr. Overmeyer's motion to lay the amendment (Mr. Osborne's) on the table was rejected by yeas 30, nays 57.
Mr. Osborne's amendment was then agreed to.
Mr. JOHNSON moved to amend the amendment by striking out Wednesday, the 26th,and inserting Monday, the 31st, which was agreed to by yeas 52, nays 36.
Mr. OVERMEYER said he did not think the proviso in the resolution was appropriate now, inasmuch as the adjournment had been fixed to such a remote day.
Mr. HUMPHREYS, Mr. SHUTT, Mr. OSBORNE and others thought the proviso had better remain.
Mr. OVERMEYER moved ineffectually--yeas 39, nays 48--to reconsider the vote by which the House adopted, the proviso in the resolution that a fee and salary and the specific appropriation bills shall be passed.
The resolution was then adopted as amended by yeas 47, nays 37.
The House then took up the consideration of the bill [H. R. 344] on fees and salaries, with the Senate amendments thereto, which were read.
Mr. ALLEN, of Putnam, moved that the House concur in the Senate amendments. He made this motion in the hope that the House would not concur.
This motion was rejected.
Mr. OSBORNE, of Elkhart, offered a resolution for a reduction of all fees and salaries now in force at least 25 per cent.
Mr. WILLARD would not, be willing to reduce all fees 25 per cent.; for example, he thought the recorders' fees ought not to be reduced.
The resolution was adopted.
On the motion of Mr. DALTON a
The SPEAKER appointed as such committee on the part of the House Messrs. Dalton and March.
The bill [S. 195] providing for the redemption of real estate, was read the first time and passed to a second reading.
Mr. OWEN called up his bill [H. R. 631] to legalize sheriff's sales of real estate, which was read the third time and finally passed the House by yeas 73, nays 4.
Mr. HUMPHREYS moved for the appointment of a
The motion was agreed to and the SPEAKER appointed Messrs. Humphreys and Overmeyer said committee on the part of the House.
Mr. PERRY called up Mr. Lehman's bill [H. R. 476] to punish the embezzlement of railroad tickets, which was read the third time, and finally passed the House by yeas 75, nays 4.
Mr. REED exiled up his bill [H. R. 457] to amend the 66th section of the act to divide the State into judicial circuits, which was read the third time, and finally passed the House by yeas 75, nays 1.
Mr. FANCHER called up his bill [H. R. 418] to amend sections 26 and 28 of the school law which was read the third time.
Mr. VANPELT did not think this was a very good bill. He said this was throwing cat fights in every school district.
Mr. HART thought there were no persons so well calculated to select the teacher as the patrons of the school.
Mr. BLOCKLEY hailed the provisions of this bill as most wholesome, and there had been five schools broken up in his part of the State by refusing the patrons of the school the right to select the teacher.
Mr. ALLEN, of Putnam, did not suppose but every trustee would be glad to see this bill pass, and he was in favor of it.
Mr. SAINT had been the victim of a successful contest for teacher of a school, and some feeling was created at that time which had not yet been forgotten,
Mr. EDWINS believed that it was right and proper to give the selection of a teacher to the patrons of a school. He was opposed to the one-man power, and hoped the bill would pass.
Mr. WIMMER favored the passage of the bill.
Mr. KESTER thought this law was better than the old law. The parent and guardian are the best judges as to who should teach their children or wards, and he hoped the bill would pass.
Mr. KELLY hoped this bill would become a law, as he thought the majority of the patrons should select the teacher.
Mr. M1TCH LL thought this bill would make a wholesome law. He believed in the elective franchise in this as well as in other matters.
Mr. HUBBARD endorsed the bill heartily, as he believed it gives the women the right to vote, and he regarded it as a step in the right direction.
Mr. THAYER objected, because it allowed only parents and guardians or patrons of the school a vote in the selection of a teacher. To tax a roan for school purpose, and then to say, because he had no children, he shall have no voice in the election, was taxation without representation.
Mr. FANCHER insisted that the power to elect a teacher should be vested in the parent or guardian, as provided in this bill. For building school houses or other school purposes ail the tax-payers have a vote. He thought the bill just and proper, and ought to pass.
Under the operations of the previous question the bill passed the House by yeas 53, nays 30.
Mr. REICHELDERFER called up his bill [H. R. 460] to amend section 2 of an act for the laying out, opening, widening and vacating of streets, alleys, etc., which was read the third time and finally passed the House by yeas 68, nays 11.
The House then adjourned.
Yesterday's minutes were not read.
On motion by Mr. LEEPER the bill [H. R. 264], to provide for the securing of payments due laboring men, was read the second time with amendments by a committee, which were concurred in.
Mr. HARRIS, explaining: The amendments would secure a preferred claim of $50 for laborers where wages are earned and due from insolvents.
On motion by Mr. LEEPER the constitutional restriction was dispensed with, the bill considered as en grossed, read the third time, and passed the Senate by yeas 45, nays 0.
Mr. HEFRON presented a petition against the repeal of the railroad aid law.
Mr. LANGDON moved that the House of Representatives be requested to return to the Senate the specific appropriation bill [H. R. 640], desiring that tills motion should supersede and make void all proceedings relating to it since it was perfected by the House of Representatives.
Mr. KRAMEK objected to the motion, as the joint committee of conference on this bill are ready to report.
Mr. COMSTOCK said but little in this Senate had been done regularly and in order, and as this was simply a waver of the form, he thought it unimportant.
The LIEUTENANT GOVERNOR stated his appointment of the conference committee was made only with a view to facilitate business.
The motion was rejected by yeas 45, nays 0.
Mr. HART had a bill [S. 459] to legalize a certain organization in Gibson county.
Referred to the
On motion by Mr. REEVE his bill [S. 458] to provide for a revision, codification and publication of the laws of this State, was read the second time, with a committee substitute reducing the number of revisers from five to three, extending the time for its completion to September, 1880, and providing only for a revision to be submitted to the next General Assembly.
On motion by Mr. VIEHE this subject was made the special order for 3 o'clock p. m.
On motion of Mr. KAHLO the Senate proceeded to the consideration of House bills on the second reading:.
The bill [H. R. 20], providing for the establishment of a State Bureau of statistics and geology--the governor to appoint bi-annually a chief who is an expert in the science of geology and chemistry at a salary of $1,500, was read the second time with committee amendments, reducing the salary to $1,200 and the annual expense from $3.000 to $2,000. The amendments were concurred in, and ordered engrossed.
The bill [H. R. 38] to amend sec. 6 of the act concerning enclosures,trespassing animals and partition fences, was indefinitely postponed.
The bill [H. R. 361] authorizing sheriffs to administer oaths in all matters pretaining to the duties of their office, was also indefinitely postponed.
The bill [H. R. 390] to legalize elections of township trustees in the April election of 1878 was read the second time, with a majority report recommending passage, and a minority report recommending indefinite postponement.
Mr. HEFRON thought this bill ought to pass, in order to settit vexed questions, and prevent litigation.
Mr. MENZlES said the supreme court has decided that the township trustees elected in 1878 were not eligible, if they had held two terms before, and this was a bold attempt to upset that decision.
Mr. VIEHE also opposed the bill.
Mr. REEVE insisted the bill was only intended to legalize the election of those trustees qualified to hold the office, and he desired an opportunity to so amend it.
Mr. LANGDON coincided with the opinion of the minority of the
Mr. KENT: On account of the seeming discrepency between the acts of 1877 on this
subject there is a difference of opinion between
Mr. REEVE held if this bill becomes a law it will not affect cases already filed, as the courts can not be ousted of jurisdiction by a curative statute. It is unjust to indefinitely postpone this bill, without putting in it the provision he referred to a few minutes ago.
Mr. OLDS thought this proposition should be kicked out as soon as possible.
The minority report was concurred in by--yeas 25, nays 20.
The bill [H. R. 385] to exempt growing crops from sale on execution until the same shall have fully matured, was indefinitely postponed.
The bill [H. R. 455] to transfer to the United States the title of the State of Indiana to the Antietam National Cemetery, was read the second time.
The bill [H. R. 59] providing for appeals from County Commissioners in cases of annexation of Territory, and cities and towns against the will of the owner, was read the second time.
On motion by Mr. URMSTON, under a suspension of the constitutional rule, the bill was read the third time, and passed by--yeas 40, nays 0.
The bill [H. R. 642] to legalize the incorporation of the town or Walton, Cass county, was read the second time.
The bill [H. R. 368] for the relief of George N. Winchell and other sureties of a defaulting Township Trustee, was read the second time.
The bill [H. R. 497] to amend section 466 of of the general practice act of June, 1852, was indefinitely postponed.
The bill [H. R. 498] to amend an amendatory act in relation to decedents' estates--sections 65 and 66--was read the second time, with committee amendments thereto.
Mr. REEVE said this was a bill to avoid difficulties under the present law and to facilitate the adjustment of claims against estates, and he argued in favor of its propriety and necessity.
On motion by Mr. Harris the bill and report were indefinitely postponed.
The bill [H. R. 263] to amend an act amending the fish law was read the second time.
On motion by Mr. BURRELL the joint resolution [S. 45] directing the transfer of all papers concerning the Morgan Bald claims to the adjutant general's office, etc , introduced yesterday by Mr. Benz,) was taken up, read and passed the Senate by yeas 37, nays 2.
Then came the recess till 2 o'clock.
Mr. SHAFFER offered a long, facetious preamble to a resolution for a sine die adjournment next Saturday noon.
On motion by Mr. OLDS the preamble was strickent out.
Mr. REEVE made an ineffectual motion--yeas 8, nays 39--to lay the resolution on the table.
Mr. FOWLER made an ineffectual motion--yeas 36, nays 14--to substitute Monday.
The resolution was then adopted without a division.
The bill [H. R. 583] to authorize towns to levy a tax to pay for lighting the streets with gas was read the second time.
The bill [H. R. 82] in relation to foreign express companies was read the second time.
Mr. BURRELL explained the objest of the bill to be to place express companies in a position where they can punish embezzling employes, etc.
Mr. MENZIES moved to take up the bill [S. 456] for the government of the State prisons, that the Legislature may do its duty to the people of the State by quieting threatened litigation with reference to the management of these institutions.
Mr. WOOD said this thing had got to be an outrageous scandal in his part of the State, and he was surprised to see so many senators unwilling to remove that scandal.
Mr. FOWLER thought this bill ought to be taken up and discussed.
On motion by Mr. OLDS, the motion to take up this bill was laid on the table by yeas 25, nays 19.
On motion by Mr. REEVE, the Senate proceeded to the consideration of the special order, being the committee's substitute for his bill [S. 458] for a revision of the statute laws of the State of Indiana. The report of the committee was concurred in.
Mr. REEVE said this substitute bill was similar to the law under which the revision was made in 1843, except there was but one commissioner then, while this bill provides for three. On his further motion the constitutional rule was dispensed with--yeas 34, nays 12--and the bill read the third time.
Mr. LANGDON regretted that he would have to vote against this bill, because it proposes no compensation to the revisors. The State has been cursed with an inadequate revision of her laws since 1852. The bill ought to set forth a specific and liberal compensation for the revisors; otherwise there will be three gentlemen pursuing the next Legislature, and probably many following, with a claim for maybe $5,000 or $6,000 apiece on account of this work.
Mr. HARRIS said every one admitted there should be a revision of the statutes that can be relied on. Indiana needs such a work. The objection raised by the senator [Mr. Langdon] is an unusual one. He favored the passage of this measure, and if $500 is not enough for them they ought to be allowed more. The poorest paymasters in the world pays beforehand.
The bill passed the Senate by yeas 33, nays 10.
The bill [H. R. 271] to amend sections 1, 2, 4 and 5, of the act authorizing street railways to use public highways, streets, etc., was read the second time.
The bill [H. R. 453] to amend section 2 of the supervisor of highways'act of March 5,1877.
Mr. TRUSLER stating that a similar bill has already passed and received the signature of the governor, on his motion it was indefinitely postponed.
The bill [H. R. 377] to regulate the practice of medicine, midwifery and surgery, was read the second time with committee amendments.
Mr. WILSON moved that the bill and report be indefinitely postponed.
Mr. SHAFFER, hoped the motion would not prevail.
Mr. FOSTER offered a bill on this subject two years ago, and also at this session, and being in favor of legislation on this subject, while this one does not fully meet his notion, he was willing to accept it rather than none.
Mr. REEVE had a few serious objections to this bill. It is in the interest of only one school. It allows quacks that have been run into this out of other States to continue in practice, etc, etc.
Mr. HEFRON did not expect a perfect bill at once, but as the people are expecting legislation on this subject this bill proposes a liberal and fair enactment.
Mr. STREIGHT thought one of the most foolish of the many foolish things done by this
Legislature would be to pass a medical bill at this stage of the session when we have
neither the time nor inclination to give such
Mr. TRUSLER thought the Senate has occupied time enough in the discussion of medical bills. He demanded the previous question.
Mr. WILSON made an ineffectual motion yeas 18, nays 23-to indefinitely postpone the bill and committee report.
Mr. REEVE moved to amend the report of the committee by substituting his bill S. 278 for the bill H. R. 377.
On motion by Mr. F0STER this motion was laid on the table by yeas 24, nays 17.
The report of the committee was concurred in.
Mr. LEEPER, from the
Mr. SHAFFER moved for another vote on the passage of the bill [S. 278--Mr. Reeve's] providing who may practice medicine and surgery and carry on the business of apothecary and pharmaceutist, which heretofore failed to pass for want of a constitutional majority.
Mr. WILSON moved ineffectually--yeas 18, nays 19--to lay this motion on the table. The motion for another vote was rejected by yeas 15, nays 25.
Mr. REEVE, when casting his negative vote, expressed himself against the propriety of taking up his bill at this time.
The bill [H. R. 179] to prevent the manufacture and sale of adulterated commercial fertilizers was read the second time.
The bill [H. R. 414] for the relief of Patrick Hollegan was read the second time.
The bill [H. R. 132] to provide for issuing letters testamentary and letters of administration was read the second time.
The bill [H. R. 383] to legalize the Kokomo Gaslight and Coke company was read the second time.
Mr. REEVE objected to this bill, because it proposes to legalize everything the company has done, as he understood the reading.
The bill [H. R. 131] to amend sec. 77 of the general practice act, was read the second time.
Mr. OLDS did not believe in passing bills overturning and unsettling practices so long established. He moved to indefinitely postpone this bill.
Mr. HARRIS said justice could be barred for an indefinite length of time owing to the crowded state of the docket under the present practice. Such a practice is not known in many other States. He favored the passage of this bill.
Mr. REEVE said the bill would, afford great relief to the practice of the State, and he trusted it would not be treated cavalierly.
Mr. DICE pronounced this as a most iniquitous bill, and he was surprised attorneys would sneak in favor of it.
The motion to indefinitely postpone was agreed to.
The bill [H. R. 174] for the repeal of the provoke law, was read the second time, with a committee report recommending its indefinite postponement.
Mr. HARRIS moved, to concur in the report.
Mr. STREIGHT hoped the report would not be concurred in. He considered the law a disgrace to the statute book.
Mr. TRUSLER heartily concurred in the remarks of the senior senator from Marion [Mr. Streight]. This provoke law furnishes a large amount of work for lawyers: It multiplies litigation, and takes bread from the mouths of hungry children. No State in the Union has a like odious law on the statute books.
Mr. HEFRON conceded there is an obnoxious feature in this law--the part which refers to the attempt to provoke. Where an assault is made the assaulting party should be punished. He knew of small boys and women being prosecuted for attempting to provoke full-grown men. He hoped the law would be modified as to correct this abuse.
Mr. MENZ1ES recognized the fact that thia was a mean, cowardly law, and offered a premium on cowardice. He hoped the Senate would join the House in repealing it.
Mr. OLDS moved to amend the report by changing the recommendation to a favorable one.
Mr. REEVE thought the provoke law had done more good in preventing assaults than any other one on the statute books. He had no doubt it prevents over 2,000 breaches of the peace in the State every year. There has been no libel law, and good men bad no protection except this. Senators, when calling this a coward's law do not reflect that it is the only law we hays for the protection of brave men from the foul months of scallawags, poltroons and cowards. Brave men obey the law in its smallest elements as well as in the greatest. Only cowards violate law. The law will tolerate no breach of the peace; it regards no words as a provocation for a blow. A brave man may stand by and hear his wife or daughter insulted by the veriest scoundrel that walks the street, and if he should knock the black-guard down or be guilty of the slightest infraction of the peace and be prosecuted therefor he has only the sympathy of the jury to rely on for protection--they must violate their oaths or find him guilty. Without this law on the statute books men who are law-abiding have no protection against the foulest insults of those who are utterly irresponsible, and who the law can reach in no way under the provisions of the statute, which is sought by this bill to be repealed.
And then the Senate adjourned.
The clerk's journal was not read. Mr. BRIGGS introduced a bill [H. R. 697] for the more speedy determination of causes in the circuit and superior courts,which was read the first time.
The bill [S. 427] to amend sections one and two of an act regulating public warehouses, etc., was read the first time, and passed to the second reading.
The bill [S. 195] providing for the redemption
of real estate, was read the second time and referred to the
Mr. Faulkner's bill [H. R. 696] providing what counties shall constitute the fifth, sixth and seventh judicial circuits was read the second time, and ordered engrossed for the third reading.
Mr. ROBESON called up the bill [S. 118] authorizing the appointment of a receiver by the court, or judge in vacation, in actions to vacate a fraudulent purchase, between parties jointly interested, where property is in danger of being lost by mortgagee, for the foreclosure of a mortgage, when a corporation has been dissolved, or insolvent, or has forfeited its separate rights, ere., which was read the third time, and passed the House by yeas 70. nays 2.
Mr. BEARSS called up his bill [H. R. 669] to
Mr. RODMAN called up the bill [S. 57] for the establishment of workhouses, which was read the third time .
Mr. ALLEN, of Putnam, said this was a bill that ought not to pass, as it would bring convict labor in competition with labor on the streets in such cities as Indianapolis.
Mr. CONNOR contended this measure would save to each county a very large expense. He thought the bill a good one, and hoped it would pass.
Mr. ROBINSON thought it would be a very great saving to our poor people in the way of taxes; in Marion county especially.
Mr. ENGLISH said this bill originally applied only to Marion county, but now it applied to every county in the State. It was a good bill, and ought to pass.
Mr. EDWINS explained the provisions of the bill are such that counties may or may not avail themselves of its benefits. He was, therefore, in favor of the passage or this bill.
Mr. JOHNSON thought every one ought to vote against this bill. It looked to him like building a penitentiary in every county, and he did not see that it would benefit any one. If you take prisoners out in the country it would take two men to watch one, and could not benefit any but large cities.
Mr. WILLARD said if it was solely for Marion county he was willing that it should go to a committee,and be so amended, but if it is to extend all over the State he was opposed to it. Competition in labor was now so low that he was opposed to bringing convict labor in competition any further with free labor.
Mr. OWEN thought this was a good bill. It was like taking bitters--you can take it or let it alone, as you please. In counties where they need it they ought to have it, and was in favor of its passage
Mr. FANCHER said this bill was a good one, and ought to pass. By establishing a county work house you can make convicts work out their fine, when otherwise, though they may be able, they prefer to lie idly in jail during the term of their sentence.
Mr. TULLEY thought a work house could be made self-sustaining. This bill is strictly guarded, and it seemed to him there is nothing in it to be scared about.
Mr. HUMPHREYS said the houses that this bill authorizes to be built would not cost less than $2,000 each. If the bill could be amended so as to confine it to counties of 20,000 or more inhabitants he would not object to it.
Mr. MARCH thought this bill was a good one.
Mr. CUNNINGHAM was opposed to the bill because there was too much machinery about it, and because it allows a one-horse penitentiary to be established in every county in the State, and it was too expensive.
Mr. OSBORNE, of Elkhart, said it was discretionary with the county boards, and the question was, could we trust the county boards with this discretionary power? He thought we could
Mr. THOMPSON objected to this bill, on the ground of public policy. This bill provides for turning all the labor on our public works into the hands of thieves, vagrants, criminals and tramps. It brings up the question squarely, who shall have work--the condemned criminals or the honest men who are out of employment and out of the necessaries of life? This bill proposes to shift the expense of keeping our prisoners from the commonwealth to the honest poor laborers of our State, by giving the cream of all the public work to the convicted thieves and scalawags, who never work at all except when forced to do so. In the matter of living, the rich need no laws. The industrious poor should be protected and encouraged, and all the labor of our public works should be given to honest citizens instead of giving it to law-breakers, and he would vote for no law that discriminates against the honest laborer in favor of condemned criminals. If this bill affected the county of Marion and city of Indianapolis alone he might support it, but he way opposed to the erection of criminal workhouses in every county. It was a great mistake to take a day's work from the reputable poor and give it in the hand's of law breakers.
Mr. LINDLEY favored a protective tariff for American labor, but would not carry that proposition so far as to perpetrate an outrage on the masses for the benefit of a few of the lower class. He did not think honest men ought to be taxed to keep idle men in jail, when a work house might make them earn their own bread. He favored the passage of the bill.
Mr. CARTER could see nothing to be gained by the passage of this bill. If we give the commissioners power to erect these work houses they will be very likely to erect them, and for that reason he was opposed to the passage of the bill.
Mr. HEROD said there is not a "single solitary" one of these convicts whose labor will come in contact with any free labor. The convicts live in luxury in the jail at the expense of the tax-payer. It was a good bill, and he hoped the House would pass it.
The bill then finally passed the House by yeas 63, nays 26.
Mr. FAULKNER submitted the report of the special committee of the House to investigate the office of attorney general during the terms of J. C Denny and C. A. Buskirk. It is a voluminous document, largely devoted to a discussion of the construction of the law by which the office should be governed. The report concludes with the statement that the committcee has not had time to make anything like a complete examination of the books and accounts of the office, and the left it with the House to consider some plan for the recovery of the money due the State. All the members signed the report.
Mr. FAULKNER stated that in a conversation with the deputy attorney general he was told that the deputy charged the county from which he made collections $10 per day and expenses, and a still further charge of 15 per cent for all moneys collected for the State, and the attorney general gets 15 per cent. more, making 30 per cent. and $10 per day and expenses of the deputy.
Mr. OWEN moved that the report be adopted, and the committee allowed to continue their investigation.
Mr. KEITH, said the committee had seen enough to say to this House that the half had, not been told. As it stands, it is confusion worse confounded, and ought to be straightened out. He believed the amount illegally retained during the two terms investigated to be fully $75,000.
Mr. SNODDY said after we have this information he would like to see this rat hole stopped.
Mr. LEHMAN offered a resolution that the attorney general proceed to the collection of all illegal fees overcharged by General Denny and ex-Attorney General Buskirk, as shown by the report of the committee, and that the present deputy Donehay be at once dismissed.
Mr. OSBORNE offered a substitute that the committee be instructed to continue a
consideration of the subject and report to the House the best method to be pursued to
recover
On the motion of Mr. HEROD the report was recived, 500 copies ordered printed and Mr. Osborne's substitute was adopted. Then came a recess until 2 o'clock p. m.
Mr. ENGLISH introduced a bill [H. R. 698] authorizing the common council and board of aldermen in all cities having a voting population of 16,000 or more, to ordain and enforce ordinances, which was read the first time and passed to the second reading.
Mr. WORKS introduced a bill [H. R. 699] to amend section 9 of an act prescribing the duties of the attorney general, which was read the first time.
Mr. ROBINSON called up Mr. Osborne's of Elkhart, bill [H. R. 499] to amend section 336 of the general practice act, which was read the third time and passed the House by yeas 69, nays 5.
Mr. ROOKER called up his bill [H. R. 557] making it the duty of the governor of the State in certain cases to have the business of any public officer investigated, which was read the third time, and finally passed the House by yeas 63, nays 8.
Mr. SAINT called up his bill [H. R. 520] the concurrence and agreement, of any nine members of a jury of 12 men shall be sufficient to enable them to return a verdict in civil cases, which was read the third time and passed the House--yeas 61, nays 14.
Mr. SCHOLL called up the bill [S. 197] to protect the ballot box, and to procure a fair election, which was read the third time and passed the House by yeas 72, nays 3.
Mr. SCHWEITZER called up his bill [H. R. 576] authorizing notaries public to solemnize the marriage contract, which was read the third time, and finally passed the House by yeas 59, nays 15.
Mr. JOHNSON, for Mr. Shields, called up Mr. Edwins' bill [H. R. 214] to regulate the fare on railroads, which was read the third time.
Mr. EDWINS, explaining, said this bill was to make the fare uniform all over the State. There were some roads chartered by the State which, under that charter, can not charge more than three cents per mile, while others could charge more.
The bill failed for want of a constitutional majority--yeas 46, nays 29.
Mr. HUMPHREYS, from the conference committee on the specific appropriation bill [H. R. 640], reported an agreement.
Mr. REED moved that the House concur in report of the conference committee. The Senate recedes from its amendments in appropriating $81,00O, and the House recedes from its previous action to the extent of only $12,300.
Mr. OVERMEYER said it was not competent now to strike out any part of this report
unless you want to kill the bill or appoint a new
The report of the committee was then concurred in without a division.
The Senate amendments to the bill [H. R. 22] for a homestead exemption were read.
Mr. CONNER offered an amendment, which was adopted, that if such homestead shall be sold the proceeds shall be exempt to the amount of S700 for three months, and if the amount be invested in a homestead, it shall be entitled to the same exemption as the original homestead. The provisions of the homestead exemption as herein provided shall not affect contracts or obligations existing at the date of the notice and record of such homestead exemption.
Mr. ALLEN of Putnam was opposed to this amendment.
Mr. BRIGGS thought the amendment was absurd and would work disadvantageously.
Mr. WATSON said the theory of the law was to exempt a particular thing.
Mr. WILLARD thought this amendment was necessary to preserve the homestead. The bill would not encourage homestead possessions, but rather the contrary, unless the amendment be adopted.
Mr. OWEN thought we ought to vote for the amendment, as it was indispensable to a good homestead law.
The amendment was agreed to.
Mr. OVERMEYER moved to amend by striking out "not to exceed half an acre" and insert "a tract or parcel of land," and to strike out section 6, which allows a $300 exemption of personal property.
Mr. SAINT was opposed to concurring in the Senate amendment because the recording: clause was an insult to the class of people you were trying to protect. Give them the $1,000 without any restraint whatever.
Mr. WATSON favored the Senate amendment because he thought it was right. This law can not bring relief to the debtor class. He wished that it could.
Mr. THOMPSON: As the law now stands we have an exemption of $300, and he did not see any reason why we could not make an accumulative exemption. He could vote for the bill.
Mr. THAYER hoped the House would stand by the bill they had passed, and ask the Senate respectfully to secede to its amendments.
Mr. SLEETH said no man should take the money owing to another and invest it in a way that will cover it up. He would give an exemption of $500 and allow the claimant to designate just how it shall be invested.
Mr. WORKS said this kind of a law ought to be uniform, and apply to everybody alike.
Mr. BRIGGS said this bill provides that if a man have real estate, he can have $700 of that real estate exempt, and can also have $300 of his personal property exempt, making in all $1,000. On the other hand, the man who does not own real estate can have but $300 in all exempt. This is a discrimination he could not aid. Give the people an exemption of $500 or 81,000, and let that amount be chosen by the one to be benefited.
On the motion of Mr. FAULKNER the previous question was ordered, and under its operation the House refused to concur in the Senate amendment by yeas 32. nays 57.
Mr. FAULKNER, Mr. STUCKER and Mr. EDWINS entered their protest against allowing pay for the statutes for senators incorporated in the specific appropriation bill at $l2 per set.
Then the House adjourned.
The reading of the minutes was omitted.
On motion by Mr FOWLER the Senate proceeded to the consideration of House bills on their final reading.
The bill [H. R. 414] for the relief of Patrick Hallegan was read the third time and passed by yeas 36, nays 6.
Mr. WILSON, explaining: If the facts in this bill were true, no one would vote more willingly for it than he, but believing not a word of it is true, he would have to vote "no." This is but still another evidence of the necessity for a court of claims in which justice can be done to all concerned.
The bill [H. R. 455] to facilitate and authorize the transfer to the United States the interest of the State of Indiana to the Antietam National cemetery in the county of Washington, State of Maryland, was read the third time and passed by yeas 35, nays 2.
The bill [H. R. 642] to legalize the incorporation of Walton, Cass county, and an election held therein, was read the third time.
The LIEUTENANT GOVERNOR (on motion of Mr. Harris) appointed Messrs. Harris and Tarleton
a
The bill [H. R. 11] to authorize county commissioners to issue bonds to an unlimited amount, to raise money for construction of roads, and to provide for the payment thereof by taxing lands adjacent to the roads, being read the third time.
Mr. SHAFFER explained the great benefit this bill would be to the counties in his district.
Mr. HARRIS counseled not too great haste in the matter. He doubted the propriety of such a measure, and opposed the principle embodied in it, which has brought about disaster in the State of Indiana.
Mr. SHAFFER replied that the law has given general satisfaction so far, and contended the hands of the people should not be tied as to how far they may tax themselves for such improvements.
Mr. HART insisted that more safeguards should be thrown around this system of legislation, instead of increasing the evil, as this bill proposes to do.
Messrs. WINTERBOTHAM and GARRIGUS also opposed the bill.
The bill failed to pass by yeas 6, nays 34.
The bill [H. R. 20] for the establishment of a bureau of statistics and geology way read the third time, with the Senate amendments reducing the salary of the chief to $1,200 and the expenses to $2,00O a year.
Mr. REEVE favored this measure--no State should be without such a statute.
Messrs. FOWLER and MENZIES contended the Senate amendment allowing the chief to examine places where laborers are worked is a nullity.
Mr. REEVE insisted the law is already ample to enforce the provisions referred to.
Mr. COMSTOCK also thought the objection untenable. As the law is now there will be an absolute saving to the State by the passage of this bill of $2,000 annually.
Mr. HEFRON opposed creating this new department, because he believed it unnecessary to the welfare of the people; though on general principles he would favor the gathering of such information from every practicable source. When Indiana is as old as Massachusetts, which has the best statistical department in the Union, it will be time to sustain a much more extensive bureau than is proprosed in this bill.
Mr. SARNIGHAUSEN admitted this bill is not as full as it ought to be, but the first step can be taken now, and two years hence it can be enlarged. He referred to several governors' messages recommending the passage of such an act as is proposed in this bill. Such a bureau would facilitate very greatly the growth of the State, and he hoped the bill would pass.
Mr. HART doubted the propriety of establishing this new department in the State Government at this time.
The bill passed by yeas 29, nays 16.
The bill [H. R. 38] to amend section six of the act of June 4,1852, concerning enclosures, partition fences and trespassing animals failed to pass by yeas 13, nays 29.
The bill [H. R. 82] in relation to foreign express companies, was read the third time.
Mr. BURRELL explained it was to allow express companies to more readily punish embezzling employes.
Mr. HARRIS was afraid the provisions of the bill may create trouble. On his motion it was referred to a special committee of three.
Mr. HARRIS moved for a suspension of the order of business to enable him to introduce a bill supplemental to the act of March 15,1879, concerning the removal of or bringing suit by foreign corporations against citizens of this State. He explained it was amending the law passed this month by providing f hat after the violation of the said act by said companies the contracts or property by them acquired thereafter shall be void.
Mr. REEVE said the bill S. 111, which has been on the Senate files since the 17th. of January, will accomplish all desired by this new bill.
Mr. MENZIES opposed the motion to suspend the rules for the introduction of this new bill. The law it proposes to amend was passed after due consideration, and should not be amended as proposed, in order to drag people from every part of the State to courts in Indianapolis and Evansville, for the benefit of resident attorneys in those cities. The motion to suspend the order of business that the bill may be introduced was rejected by yeas 13, nays 26.
Mr. REEVE moved to take up the bill S. 111 to enable companies to hold and convey real estate in this State, etc., and put it on its passage.
On motion by Mr. STREIGHT this motion was laid on the table.
Then came the recess till 2 o'clock.
On motion by Mr. VIEHE it was ordered that when the Senate adjourn it be till 7:30 o'clock to-night.
The bill [H. R. 383] to legalize the incorporation of the Kokomo Gas Light and Coke company was read the third time and passed by yeas 32, nays 5.
The bill [H. R. 338] for the relief of George N. Winchell and others, security for a defaulting township trustee, was read the third time..
Mr. BRISCOE explained the justness of this measure.
The bill passed by yeas, 26 nays 12.
The bill [H. R. 263] to amend the fish law was read the third time and passed, by yeas 32, nays 10.
Mr. LEEPER explained its only object was to suspend the operations of the fish law during the months of March and April as far as the Kankakee river is concerned.
The bill [H. R. 179] to prevent the manufacture and sale of adulterated commercial fertilizers was read the third time and passed by yeas 40, nays 1.
Mr. P0INDEXTER hoped the bill would pass, it being a step in the right direction.
The bill [H. R. 687] to authorize a State loan to pay off a temporary loan heretofore made--$510,000 April 1 and $200,000 December 1--was read the third time and passed by yeas 30, nays 14.
The bill [H. R. 377] to regulate the practice of medicine, midwifery and surgery, being read the third time.
Mr. REEVE moved to refer the bill to a special committee of three, with instructions to substitute the bill S. 278, and report immediately, for the reason that this bill does not regulate the sale of proprietary medicines, and is greatly inferior in many other respects.
Mr. DICE opposed the motion, fearing it would kill the only bill on this subject that can be passed.
Mr. WOOLLEN appealed to the Senate to enact this measure as it is now--it can be perfected by the next General Assembly.
Mr. SHAFFER much preferred the bill, [S. 278] but seeing no chance to pass it, he would give his influence to this as the next best.
Mr. REEVE had no personal ends to serve, but from his knowledge of medicine, believing the results of this bill would be ultimately evil, he urged the Senate, in the interests of the people, to agree to his motion.
Mr. WILSON said, as far as he was advised, the physicians in his county--some 30 or 40--are opposed to legislation on this subject.
The motion to refer was rejected--yeas 16, nays 30.
The bill passed the Senate by yeas 34, nays 12.
The bill [H. R. 82] in relation to foreign express companies, was read the third time and passed--yeas 39, nays 1.
The bill [H. R. 271] to amend sections 1, 2,4 and 5, of the act authorizing street railroads to use public highways, was read the third time and passed--yeas 36, nays 2.
The bill [H. R. 583] to authorize incorporated towns to pay for lighting streets with gas, was read the third time, and passed by yeas 36, nays 2.
The bill [H. R. 132] for issuing letters testamentary and letters of administration, was read the third time and passed by yeas 36, nays 1.
The bill [H. R. 17] to repeal the county and township railroad aid act, was read the
third time with amendments by the
Mr. VIEHE moved to indefinitely postpone the bill.
Mr. REEVE assured this Senate the bill now was well guarded and an important measure- to the people of of the State.
Mr. TRAYLOR favored the motion. The people are not asking the repeal of this law, but self-interest is moving those favoring this repealing measure. Some cities went too far in making a railroad bond debt before the 2 per cent. restriction was enacted; but since then the law does not hurt any one. If the people are never burdened till burdened under the provisions of this law they will never be injured in that way. He hoped the motion would prevail.
Mr. TRUSLER also hoped the motion will prevail. He had heard no complaint of the present law. No State can prosper without the benefit of railroads. If the people want a railroad, and are willing to pay for it, he saw no necessity for interfering with them.
Mr. WOOD regarded this law above others as in favor of the fanning community of the State. Under the statute there can be no abuse because indebtedness is limited to 2 per cent. He was willing to trust the people. They have passed through an ordeal of hard times that few have seen in this century, and they will act judiciously and we can safely trust them.
The motion to indefinitely postpone was agreed to by yeas 31, nays 15.
The House concurrent resolution allowing the two principal clerks of the House $200 each for preparing, indexing and proof reading the House journals, with an amendment by tho Senate allowing $20O to each of the principal secretaries of the Senate.
Mr. LANGDON reminded the senators that this matter was poovided for in the fee and salary bill, and on his motion the resolution and report was laid on the table.
The House message informing the Senate of its refusal to concur in the Senate amendments to the bill [H. R. 20] creating a bureau of statistics and geology--being read--
Mr. SARNIGHAUSEN' moved that the Senate recede from its amendments.
Mr. HEFRON opposed this motion.
The motion was rejected by yeas 21, nays 24.
Mr. HARRIS moved that the House be requested to grant a
Mr. COFFEY made an ineffectual motion--yeas 18, nays 28--to lay this motion on the table.
The motion for a
Mr. MOORE offered a resolution to replace on the files a copy of the bill [H. R. 158] in relation to the settlement by county commissioners with county and township officers; the original of which has disappeared.
Mr. REEVE contended this contemplated action could not replace the bill on the files. There is no evidence that a copy of the original bill is not here; neither is there a copy of the substitute, nor copies of the committee reports thereon. The Senate can not assume that the original is lost, and evidence to substantiate that statement must be produced.
Mr. MOORE said this bill came to the Senate about six weeks ago, when a busy lobby appeared on this floor in opposition to it, since which time if has been spirited away by foul means.
On motion by Mr. REEVE the resolution was referred to a select committee of three-- Messrs. Moore, Shirk and Coffey with instructions to ascertain where the original bill is, and if that can not be done, whether or not a correct copy is attached to the resolution, and report to-morrow morning.
The LIEUTENANT GOVERNOR laid before the Senate an invitation from the Alumni association and citizens of Bloomington to witness the exercises of the approaching semi-centennial commencement of the State University, June 9,10 and 11.
Mr. TREAT regarded it as a matter of congratulation that the State possesses a university about to celebrate its semi-centennial. The invitation being brief and referring to an important event, he moved it be spread on the records of the Senate, and that the invitation be accepted.
The motion was agreed to.
The bill, [S. 53--Mr. Woollen's] amending section 96 of the property assessment act of December 21,1872--to supply omissions on the part of assessors, and to authorize assessment without view--was read the third time and failed to pass by yeas 23, nays 13.
The bill [S. 78--Mr. Shirk's] to amend sec. 344 of the general practice act (fully described in these reports of January 14, a. m.) was read the third time and failed to pass--yeas 22, nays 19--for want of a constitutional majority.
On motion by Mr. HARRIS the bill [H. R. 620] comprising a codification of the school laws, was taken up. The bill was read by title only. The amendments pro- posed by the Senate committee on education were read. The bill was then read--a few lines in a place--amid much merry-making for about five and a half minutes--which was considered the second reading of the bill.
Mr. FOSTER protested against this kind of proceedings.
Mr. SARNIGHAUSEN moved to concur in the committee amendments.
Mr. OLDS did not believe it right to put this bill through in this way at this late hour (6:15 o'clock) beyond the reach of amendment.
Mr. URMSTON always desired to have some knowledge of what he was voting on, but he i had no idea of what is in this report.
Mr. GARRIGUS also would like to know what such an immense mass of manuscript contains before voting upon it. He characterized this proceeding as indecent haste. There are new features in the bill, and every senator ought to know what they are before voting upon them.
The report of the committee was concurred in by yeas 29, nays 8.
Mr. MOORE stating that the examination of the Senate Journal does not disclose what amendments were made to the bill [H. R. 158] which has disappeared from the files, on his motion the bill, as it came from the house, was taken up, read the first time, and referred to the special committee thereon, appointed this afternoon.
And then the Senate adjourned.
The minutes were not read.
On the motion of Mr. CONNOR a
The speaker made the committee to consist of Messrs. Connor and Daily.
Mr. FAULKNER offered a resolution that, as the regular session had purchased the
revised statute for the use of members at $12 per set, and that the House refused to
concur therein, a conference was had, which, agreed to pay $8 per set for said statutes,
which conference was agreed to by the House, and the Senate amended the specific
appropriation bill, providing for the pay of the statutes at $12 per set, that the
concurrent resolution adopted at the regular session, providing for the payment, be
rescinded, and no money be drawn for said statutes, except as provided for in the
specific appropriation bill, and that said statutes shall be delivered to the State
librarian at the close of this session as State property, which was referred to the
The Senate joint resolution providing for the transfer to the adjutant general's office of all papers relating to the Morgan raid claims, and providing for the withdrawal of the same by the owners, was adopted by yeas 62, nays 16.
The Senate amendments to Mr. Ginz's bill [H. R. 261] for the security of laboring men in cases of assignment,was further amended, and the Senate amendments, as amended, were concurred in.
The Senate joint resolution authorizing the governor and secretary of state to release to Catharine Christian all the right and title of the State in and into the parcel of real estate held and owned by her in Southport, Marion county, was passed the House by yeas 68, nays 13.
The Senate concurrent resolution for the final adjournment on next Saturday at noon being read--
Mr. ALLEN of Putnam moved to amend by making the time Monday, March 31, 1879, at 12 o'clock, meridian.
Mr. HUMPHREYS was opposed to this resolution because two of the most important bills of this session were now before conference committees, to-wit: the fee and salary and homestead exemption bills.
Mr. BRIGGS said there are two bills pending before the Assembly that ought to be passed
before the adjournment. The people demand the passage of a fee and salary bill. One is
now before the
Mr. LEHMAN was in favor of this adjournment next Saturday. He was as anxious as any one to pass a fee and salary bill, but all this could be accomplished if the House was willing. If you set your stake the House will then work to it. An adjournment on Saturday will save to the people at least $3,000.
Mr. MARCH said we were sent here to do our duty, and while there is any prospect of bringing to a satisfactory termination important measures we ought to stay here until that is done.
Mr. TAYLOR, of Daviess, thought that we ought not to adjourn until the business of legislation shall have been accomplished. He will willing to agree to the adjournment on Monday, because he thought in that time we could take all the action necessary upon the important measures now pending.
Mr. DRAKE thought if we agree to adjourn on Saturday the fee and salary bill will go where the woodbine twineth.
Mr. OVERMEYER said all the effort to adjourn seems to develop the fact to be that the majority of this House does not intend to adjourn until the constitutional limit. If we can not pass a fee and salary bill by Saturday we can not pass one at all.
Mr. JOHNSON said the very men that desire to prevent the passage of these important bills before us are the very men that are urging an early adjournment. We should go to work and complete the business and not take up the time of the House in the vain effort to pass buncomb resolutions.
Mr. WILLARD said if we had fixed a determinate day for an adjournment, we would have worked to that day, and would have had the business complete, and more than likely ready to go home before this time. The course we are pursuing is likely to make this Legislature odious to the people He was willing to pass a fee and salary bill, but let us fix a time to adjourn.
Mr. THOMPSON: The question is, will we labor two days longer and complete the work, or will we adjourn and leave important matters unfinished? He was in favor of the resolution to adjourn on Monday, and of working to that adjournment.
Mr. CUNNINGHAM in voting for an adjournment on Saturday was satisfied his people would sustain him.
Mr. WIMMER moved ineffectually--yeas 30, nays 59--that the further consideration of the resolution be postponed until to-morrow at 2 o'clock p.m.
Mr. DAILEY moved ineffectually to add provided that the fee and salary bill and the schoolbook bill shall have passed.
Mr. ALLEN'S amendment fixing the time for Monday at noon was then agreed to by yeas 49, nays 40.
Mr. ENGLISH, when his name was called, in explanation of his vote, said: He was not to be frightened from his position in favor of an early adjournment by this cry of " county officers' lobby." "By their fruit ye shall know them." And he thought his position upon this fee and salary question was pretty well established. He had introduced the first bill introduced in this House providing for a reduction of fees and salaries of county officers, and had voted for the fee and salary bill which passed the House, and was to-day opposed to adjourning without the passage of a fee and salary bill. He favored and adjournment Saturday because he was fully confident that if the Assembly really wanted to pass a bill at all they could and would easily pass one by that time. He thought the time ample for that purpose. He had been consistently in favor of an early adjournment in the interests of a tax-ridden people, and had so voted upon every proposition to that effect, and on the first day of the session had introduced a resolution providing for an early adjournment, which was defeated. He voted " no.".
The resolution, as amended, was then adopted.
Mr. EDWINS called up his railroad fare bill, H. R. 214, that heretofore failed to pass for want of a constitutional majority, which was again put upon its passage, and failed to pass by yeas 33, nays 34.
Mr. SHANK called up his motion to reconsider the motion by which the bill [S. 21] to amend sections 1, 5, and 7 of an act establishing city courts in cities having a population of 6,000 inhabitants, was indefinitely postponed.
Mr. STEVENS said he believed the House did not understand the provisions of this bill. It had been stated that it is a bill to create city judges, but this was a mistake. The bill seeks only to amend the act of 1875. It gives no additional power to create city judges, and he hoped the House would reconsider the vote.
Mr. LEHMAN hoped the House would not reconsider the vote by which the bill was not indefinitely postponed.
Mr. ENGLISH was willing that the motion, by which the bill was indefinitely postponed, should be reconsidered, as he had had a conference with the author of the bill and he was willing the bill should be amended.
Mr. MIERS was opposed to this bill, because in his judgement, it created a new office, which he thought was useless.
Mr. OVERMEYER was in favor of the bill with the amendments proposed.
Mr. WORKS would oppose reconsideration on the ground that he was opposed to the amendment.
Mr. OSBORNE of Elkhart had no objection to the bill so far as he knew.
Mr. BAKER moved ineffectually--yeas 26, nays 55--that the motion to reconsider be laid on the table.
The motion to reconsider was then agreed to.
MR. ENGLISH moved that the bill be referred to a special committee with instructions to amend.
Mr. WORKS moved that the committee be instructed to strike out all after the enacting clause and insert that the act establishing city courts in cities having a population of 6,000 inhabitants be and the same is hereby repealed.
The amendment (Mr. Works') failed for want of a two-thirds vote--yeas 41, nays 33.
The House then took a recess until 2 o'clock.
On motion the further consideration of the bill [S. 21] was postponed until April 3, 1879, at 2 o'clock p.m.
The bill [S. 458] for a compilation and revision of the statutes was read the first time.
On the motion of Mr. OSBORNE of Elkhart the constitutional rule was suspended--yeas
67, nays 1--the bill read the second time by
Mr. WORKS' bill [H. R. 699) providing for the election, fixing the compensation and prescribing the duties of the attorney general, etc., was read the third time.
Mr. SLEETH moved to amend by adding: "Provided further, That the attorney general shall not be entitled to any fees or commissions for moneys collected from the United States," to which objection was made, when--
On his further motion, the bill was recommitted to a special committee, with instructions to insert the amendment proposed, and to report forthwith.
The SPEAKER made the committee to consist of Messrs. Sleeth, Tulley, and Taylor of Daviess.
Mr. SLEETH, from the special committee thereon, returned the bill with the amendment, as instructed by the House. The report was concurred in, and the bill finally passed the House--the constitutional rule being suspended for the purpose by yeas 77, nays 0.
The Senate amendments to Mr. Connors bill [H. R. 20] providing for a Bureau of Statistics and Geology--by adding "and the chief or his assistant shall have power to enter and examine as to the safety and sanitary condition of workshops and all places where people are employed," and reducing the salary of the chief from $1,500 to $1,200, and reducing the expenses from $3,000 to $2,COO, being read--
Mr. BRIGGS said these amendments of the Senate were tacked on to this bill to create a smelling committee to go over the State looking after other people's business, and he was opposed to concurrence in the amendments.
The House then refused to concur in the Senate amendments by yeas 31, nays 46.
Mr. SHUTT called up Mr. Tulley's bill [H. R. 613] for the redistricting of towns--a codification of all laws now governing towns--which was read the third time and finally passed the House by--yeas 52, nays 16.
Mr. SKINNER called up the bill [S. 56] prohibiting the courts of this State from entertaining jurisdiction of certain actions in certain cases, which was read the third time and finally passed the House by--yeas 62, nays 7.
Mr. SLEETH called up the bill [S. 195] for the redemption of real estate, etc., which was read the third time.
Mr. SLEETH obtained unanimous consent to strike out the proviso in section three, and with this amendment he believed the bill was a good one and ought to pass.
The bill then passed the House by yeas 71, nays 5.
Mr. SNODDY called up Mr. Kelley's bill [H. R. 353] defining what shall constitute a newspaper withins the legal meaning of the term--any newspaper published in Indiana that has adopted, and any newspaper that may here- after adopt what is commonly known as the auxiliary plan is hereby declared to be a newspaper within the meaning of that term--which was read the third time and failed to pass for want of a constitutional majority--yeas 49, nays 25.
Mr. OSBORNE of Elkhart asked and obtained leave of absence for the balance of the session on account of sickness in his family.
On motion by Mr. WIMMER the speaker was authorized to draw his warrant for Mr. Osborne's per diem to the close of the session,
Mr. STEVENS called up his bill [H. R. 16] defining what property held and owned by any person or persons, and transferred under the laws of this State to any township, town or city may be taxed for educational purposes in said township or city, which was read the third time, and passed the House by yeas 58 nays 19.
A message from the Senate informing the House that the Senate had refused to recede
from its amendments to the bill [H. R. 20] to
establish a board of statistics and geology, and asking for a
On the motion of Mr. WATSON the House agreed to appoint a committee of conference.
The Speaker made the committee on the part of the House to consist of Messrs. Watson and Briggs.
Mr. WATSON introduced a bill [H. R. 70O] for an act calling for the fees, perquisites and emoluments, etc., of all State and county officers, which was read the first time and passed to the second reading.
The House then adjourned.
The reading of the journal was omitted.
On motion by Mr. SARNIGHAUSEN the Senate resumed the consideration of the bill [H. R.
620] to provide for a general system of common schools. He said two years ago the
Legislature authorized the superintendent of public instruction to arrange the laws on
the subject of corn men schools in a convenient form, which has been submitted in the
shape of this bill. Several amendments were made in the House of Representatives, and
the Senate
Mr. GRUBBS moved to reconsider the vote of last night by which the report of the committee was concurred in, in order that the committee amendments may be perfected.
Mr. GARRIGUS thought in several particulars the bill should be improved. Last night the great haste in which this bill was put through precluded proper consideration.
The motion to reconsider was agreed to.
On motion by Mr. GRUBBS section 32 was amended by limiting the examine on fee to $1.
Mr. GARRIGUS moved, ineffectually, to strike out the proviso to section 32 allowing school boards in cities to license teachers.
Mr. LANGDON desired to see the proviso remain as placed by the committee.
Mr. MENZIES moved to amend by adding a proviso to section 45, that school furniture shall not be changed or removed, or shall any school building be refurnished with new furniture oftener than once in 10 years, nor shall text books (in cities as well) be changed oftener than once in 10 years, unless by unanimous consent of all the members of the school board. He knew of whole families made millionairs by profits derived from the sale of text books in the common schools, so often have they been changed in the last 20 or 25 years.
Mr. LANGDON said discoveries were rapidly being made that are and should be incorporated in school text books, and to cut that off by this amendment is an innovation that should not be allowed.
Mr. STREIGHT and Mr. HEFRON favored the amendment.
It was agreed to.
On motion of Mr. COMSTOCK, the forfeit of one day's wages for absence from institutes, was stricken out.
Mr. HART moved to strike out all relating to county superintendents visiting schools, which was rejected on motion by Mr. FOWLER.
Mr. URMSTON moved to amend so as to make the employment of teachers dependent upon a decision of the patrons of the school at a regular school meeting.
Mr. SARNIGHAUSEN reminded senators that this system has been tried and found to bring about great confusion and often litigation.
Mr. TRUSLER has had experience in this master and favored the amendment. Under the present system confusion and dissatisfaction is continually brought about by the trustees imposing upon the, districts teachers not satisfactory to the patrons of the school.
Mr. URMSTON objected to having trustees dictating what persons shall teach the common schools.
Mr. REEVE said this plan had been tried and found to be productive of neighborhood quarrels.
Mr. TRAYLOR referred to the provisions of the law which prevents the dismissal of teachers unless for sufficient cause; and regarded that as a difficult matter in many cases where the teacher is obnoxious to the patrons of the school.
Mr. HEFRON favored leaving in the hands of the people the government of their own affairs as far as it can be done. Teachers should not be employed in total disregard of the wishes of the patrons of the school.
Mr. FOWLER opposed the amendment while conceding the fact that the wishes of
Mr. WOOD believed this amendment proposes the best kind of Democratic doctrine. There has more township trouble grown up out of this question than any other, and this is the best way to bring about harmony and peace.
The amendment was agreed to.
Mr. COFFEY made an ineffectual motion to reconsider the vote by which the committee amendments were concurred in so he might move to reduce the per diem of county superintendents from $4 to $3.
The amendments were ordered engrossed.
Mr. HARRIS moved that the Senate amendments be considered as engrossed, in order that the bill might be read the third time now, and put upon its passage.
Mr. FOSTER (replying to any inquiry from the chair) said this bill has not been read the second time as every Senator on the floor knows. It was pretended, to be read. It was read in about one or two minutes, and then that enormous bill was considered as read the second time; whereupon, at the time, he protested against such proceedings.
The motion [Mr. Harris'] was agreed to.
Mr. WINTERBOTHAM said as many members were dissatisfied with the reading given that bill yesterday; it is but fair it should now be read distinctly, that every senator may have an opportunity of understanding it.
The bill, H. R. 620, was then ordered read the third time, pending the reading on which--
Came the usual recess till 2 o'clock.
The reading of the bill [H. R. 620] having been completed Mr. OLDS facetiously inquired whether the sections [there are over 160] were numbered correctly. He did not hear the sections read consecutively. It was passed by the Senate by yeas 38, nays 6.
Mr. MOORE from the select committee on the lost bill [H. R. 158] in relation to settlements of county commissioners with county, township and school officers, returned the same with a majority report, embracing amendments, and a minority report recommending indefinite postponement.
Mr. REEVE rose to a point of order: that the special committee appointed on yesterday to inquire if this bill was lost, has not reported; that there is no evidence that the bill is lost, and if lost, only a copy with all its attachments, as it was when lost, can be filed; that the bill having been passed by the House and amended in the Senate, and lost from the files if lost. If a copy of the bill is to be obtained from the House, it must come certified as a copy at the time it was lost; if introduced here as a new bill it is not a lost bill, and it can only be done by unanimous consent, and such consent has not been given nor asked; it cannot be introduced here as a new bill and also as a lost bill that has passed the House and been amended in the Senate. Objection was made to its introduction, unless in the condition when it passed from the files; no unanimous consent has been asked or granted.
The PRESIDING OFFICER [Mr. Urmston in the chair) overruled the point of order.
Mr. REEVE appealed from the decision of the chair--pending which--
Mr. KENT from the
Mr. WOOLLEN did not believe this report would bring about any reduction, and he moved it lay on the table till to-morrow.
Mr. SHIRK favored this motion.
The motion was rejected by yeas 20, nays 26.
The report of the committee was concurred in by yeas 32, nays 14--as follows:
Those voting in the affirmative were Messrs., Briscoe, Cadwallader, Comstock, Davenport, Davis, Foster, Fowler, Grubbs, Harris, Hart, Hefron, Kahlo, Kent, Kramer, Langdon, Leeper, Major, Menzies, Moore, Olds, Peterson, Ragan, Reiley, Smith, Streight, Tarlton, Traylor, Trusler, Urmston, Viehe, Wood, Woollen.--32.
Those voting in the negative were Messrs. Benz, Burrell, Garrigus, Mercer, Poindexter, Reeves, Sarnighausen, Shaffer, Shirk, Taylor, Treat, Weir, Wilson, Winterbotham--14.
Pending the roll call--
Mr. FOSTER (in explanation) did not think this bill was a reduction--he was satisfied it was not, because county officials, who have been here as thick as flies, have their faces wreathed in smiles.
Mr. FOWLER, when his name was called, said he could not tell whether this measure proposes a reduction or an increase, and he apprehended no senator, aside from the two on the committee, knew any more about it than he; but acting solely on the report of the committee, he should vote "aye."
Mr. GARRIGUS, when his name was called, pointed out a few discrepancies he noticed during the reading of the report. He could not vote for concurrence.
Mr. KENT, in explanation, said he would like to have seen the report more fully discussed. He voted for concurrence, although believing the reduction to be too great, because the committee did the very best they could.
Mr. SHIRK, when his name was called, said he had been in favor of reduction from the highest to the lowest, and should vote against concurrence, believing this bill, instead of reducing, in many instances, increases the salaries. He thought it would be found that the only reduction was in the clerk's office.
Mr. STREIGHT, in explanation of his vote, said he believed the people demanded a reduction of fees and salaries. The committee promise it does reduce, and, believing this is the only bill that can be obtained this session, and whatever reduction we get will be so much of a relief to the people, he voted "aye."
Mr. WOOLLEN, when his name was called, said he had spent a great deal of hard labor on this bill, and, not wishing to vote against it, being assured it does make a reduction of fees and salaries, he voted "aye."
Mr. KRAMER, when the roll was finished understanding if the report is not concurred in the bill can not be amended, he changed his vote from "no" to "aye."
The vote was then announced as above recorded. So the report was concurred in.
Mr. COMSTOCK, from the
Mr. HEFRON opposed concurrence in the report.
The report was concurred in by yeas 30, nays 14.
On motion by Mr. WILSON, the pending appeal [Mr. Reeve's] was laid on the table by yeas 26, nays I1?.
Mr. REEVE spoke in favor of concurring in the report of the minority.
Mr. MOORE stated the only two points in this bill: That settlements of county boards With officers shall not be conclusive; and that where officers have paid over funds with which they are not justly chargeable, the county commissioners are authorized to remit such money. Where any injustice could be done to the State, county or township by this bill he could not conceive. In concluding, he demanded the previous question, winch being seconded, under its operations the minority report was rejected by yeas 8, nays 36, and the majority report was concurred in. On his further motion the bill H. R. 158 was read the second time.
On motion of Mr. TRUSLER, the Senate proceeded to the consideration of House bills on the second reading:
The bill [H. R. 589] to authorize the township trustee of Union township, Union county, to pay indebtedness incurred by a former trustee; the bill [H. R. 549] to amend section 5 of s the act to facilitate the transaction of business in courts, with reference to special judges; the bill [H. R. 608] for the relief of Aaron Combs et al., security of a defaulting trustee,were severally read the second time.
The bill [H. R. 467] to amend section 18 of the act regulating descents and the apportionment of estates, being read the second time.
Mr. MENZIES explained: Widows having inherited properly by first marriage after a subsequent marriage, if the children be of age, may alienate her interest by joining them in a deed. He made an ineffectual motion to have the bill read the third time and put on its passage.
The bill [H. R. 32] in relation to prosecution of felonies by affidavit or information was read the second time.
The bill [H. R. 477] to define and punish the
crime of burglary and house breaking, was read the second time and referred to the
The bill [H. R. 310] to allow sheriffs and constables to it follow defendants into an adjoining county and make a legal arrest: the bill [H. R. 192] to legalize the incorporation and all official acts of each and every officer of Butler, DeKalb county; the bill [H. R. 286] to amend an amendatory act concerning the duties of coroners, the bill [H. R. 115] to amend sec. 1. of the act for the protection of the Sabbath; the bill [H. R. 290] to amend sec. 1 of the act concerning the running at large of animals; the bill [H. R. 560] for relief of John J. Justice et al., securities for a defaulting township trustee; the bill [H.R. 420] for the relief of Alex Ingalls and others, securities of a defaulting trustee; the bill [H. R. 621] to legalize the levy of taxes by the city of Kendallville, were severally read the second time.
On motion by Mr. REEVE the Senate agreed to proceed to the consideration of Senate bills on the second reading,
Mr. HARRIS, from the
On motion by Mr. REEVE the report was laid on the table, the committee discharged,
the chair authorized to appoint another
The LIEUTENANT GOVERNOR made the Senate committee to consist of Messrs. Grubbs and Fowler.
Mr. FOWLER moved to take up the bill, [S. 456] for the government of the State prisons.
Mr. MENZ1ES humorously called upon the senator from Laporte [Mr. Winterbotham] to father his child--and take again under his parental care the prison bill he so gallantly fought for but a few weeks ago.
Mr. WINTERBOTHAM replied that he could forego all the good in his prison bill, while knowing it would be used for a foul and base purpose. He had been misrepresented in this matter, and took occasion to say, among other things, that in no instance had he been actuated by impure or selfish motives.
Mr. WOOLLEN moved to substitute the board of health bill, [S. 179.]
And then the Senate adjourned.
Prayer service this morning by Mr. HANDY, representative from Hancock county.
The reading of minutes was omitted.
Mr. HEROD called up his bill [H. R. 693] for an act to authorize Thomas Wren to prosecute the city of Indianapolis to recover money claimed to be due him, which was read the third time and passed the House by yeas 71, nays 4.
Mr. STUCKER called up his bill [H. R. 229] to amend section 9 of an act touching the relation of guardian and ward, which was read the third time. He said this amendment requires the guardian to show an itemized statement or report of their ward's estates; to show to whom money is loaned, and upon what security. It is intended to save wards' estates, and save guardians' bondsmen. If this bill passes no guardian can convert wards'estate to his own benefit without the sureties knowing it, and the court will be better enabled to protect the ward. The bill then passed the House by yeas 82, nays 2.
Mr. TAYLOR of Daviess, called up his bill [H. R. 657] to amend section 642 of the general practice act, which was read the third time and finally passed the House by yeas 77, nays 0.
Mr. TAYLOR of Lagrange, called up the bill [S. 37] to enable the Board of Commissioners to dispose of allowances, where the same has remained uncalled for for a period of five years, etc., which was read the third time and passed the House by yeas 51, nays 16.
Mr. SNODDY called up the bill [H. R. 353] defining what shall constitute a newspaper within the meaning of the law, which failed for want of a constitutional majority, it was again put upon its passage and finally passed the House by yeas 71, nays 2.
Mr. TAYLOR of Warrick, called up the bill [S. 381] "That publication of legal and other official matters printed in the English language shall be lawful if published in any newspaper of general circulation published in the county," which was read the third time and finally passed the House by yeas 74, nays 2.
Mr. THAYER called up his bill [H. R. 417] for the protection of hotels, inn-keepers, and boarding-houses, etc., which was read the third time.
Mr. TULLEY thought the bill would give a chance for inn-keepers to arrest parties and. extort money from them on a mere pretense, He was therefore, opposed to its passage,
Mr. THAYER said just such a law had been in successful operation in the State of Michigan for some time, and he thought it was a good law and ought to pass.
The bill then failed to pass for want of a constitutional majority yeas 39, nays 37.
Mr. THOMPSON called up his bill [H. R. 581] to amend section 1 of an act providing for voluntary assignments, which was read the third time and finally passed the House by yeas 72, nays 0.
Sir--Last night I read the report of your committee. As you are aware, I have been unable to meet with the committee on account of the sickness of my wife and two little daughters. So far as your report shows small discrepancies to exist in certain counties, I hope to be able to explain them when I can personally examine the accounts, but your report, so far as it relates to me, seems devoted mainly to certain fees retained by my asssistants and myself. On that subject the law being loosely and awkwardly drawn, I took the opinion in writing or one of the best lawyers in the State--then governor--and 1 think such fees were retained in accordance with it. I desire that the courts may decide the question. If they hold I am liable for what was retained by assistants and myself it would probably amount to more than my bond. My situation for paying is just this: I have mortgaged all I have to my surety, hardly sufficient to idemnify. I have nothing else, haying come back here poorer by about $4,000 than when I went to Indianapolis four years ago. I then left a law practice worth over $5,000 a year, and so far since my return have had an equally good business, probably better. If the courts decide I owe anything I am willing to devote the balance of my life to work to pay it off, to show that I did not wish to steal anything from the State. It may be proper for me to add that while you will see I could have done so to large amounts, I actually had to borrow money to pay in part the freight on my household furniture to get back here. Do not understand me as finding fault with the committee, only I beg respectfully to dissent from its views of the law upon the subject of the fees of the assistants and myself. Please submit this to the House.
The report of the
Mr. ALLEN of Putnam desired to express his disapproval of the reduction of jurors' fees, while the salaries of judges remain as they were, viz:, $2,500 per year. He did not approve of the reduction. It was the laboring and business men of the county who were summoned to appear and act as jurors, and the amount allowed in this report ($1.50 per day) will not more than pay their board while attending court.
Mr. THORNBURGH called up the bill [S. 271] enlarging the jurisdiction of mayors of cities and justices of the peace in criminal cases, etc., which was read the third time.
On the motion of Mr. WORKS the bill was laid on the table.
Then came the recess till 2 o'clock.
Mr. FAULKNER'S concurrent resolution in relation to the revised statutes for Senators, introduced early yesterday morning, was adopted.
Mr. TULLEY called up the bill [S. 267] to amend section 1 of an act to amend sections 550 and 551 of the general practice act, which was read the third time and passed the House by yeas 67, nays 3.
Mr. VAN VALZAH called up the bill [S. 374] to amend the charter of the town of Clarksville, which was read the third time.
Mr. LEHMAN moved that the bill be recommitted to a committee of three.
On the motion of Mr. EDWINS, the motion to recommit was laid on the table.
On motion of Mr. OVERMEYER the bill was laid on the table by yeas 46, nays 30.
Mr. VANPELT called up the bill [S. 31] to amend section 1 of an act authorizing school trustees in city or incorporated towns to pay over to such city or town surplus special school revenue, for the payment of indebtedness created for school building purposes, and legalizing acts where such surplus has been appropriated, which was read the third time and passed the House by yeas 69, nays 2.
Mr. VAWTER called up Mr. Stevens' bill [H. R. 160] to amend section 27 of an act regulating descents, which was read the third time.
Mr. STEVENS, explaining, said this bill amends section 27 so as to entitle the widow of a deceased husband one-third of his personal property after the payment of his debts. As the law now stands the husband may take advantage of his widow. He may have left 850,000 in personal property, and if by will his property has been secured to other parties the widow can hold but $500. This is unjust. When we deprive the good wives of our State of all participation in the making of our laws, by which the rights of property is determined, we should be just and generous. He hoped the bill would pass.
The bill then passed the House by yeas 71, nays 8.
Mr. BRIGGS, from the
The report of the committee was concurred in.
Mr. WATSON called up the bill [S. 198] requiring railroad engineers to sound the whistle before crossing highways, which was read the third time, and passed the House by yeas 64, nays 9.
Mr. WILLARD called up the bill, [S. 59] to amend section 22 of an act for the incorporation of towns, etc., which was read the third time, and finally passed the House by yeas 63, nays 15.
Mr. WIMMER called up Mr. Allen's, of Putnam, bill [H. R. 674] to define certain practice in the various courts, including mayor's courts, etc. It provides that where a trial is had before any mayor or justices of the peace for the violation of an ordinance or laws of the State, where such trial results in a conviction, and where a fine or other penalty is entered against the defendant, such proceeding had shall be a bar to any further proceeding, which was read the third time, and finally passed the House by yeas 61, nays 14.
Mr. WORKS called up the bill [S. 432] to amend section 10 of an act to establish a House of Refuge, etc., which was read the third time--infants admitted between the ages of 7 and 18 years--and finally passed the House by yeas 79, nays 0.
The SPEAKER, being at the foot of the roll call, at the request of Mr. English, called up the bill [H. R. 698] authorizing the Common Council and Board of Aldermen in all cities having a voting population of 16,000 or more, to ordain and enforce ordinances to provide for the regulating and licensing of certain trades, occupations, etc, which was read the third time.
Mr. WILLARD said he was against a law that would tax a real estate agent and not tax
or license a doctor or a lawyer. He regarded
The bill then failed to pass the House by yeas 20, nays 59.
Mr. SHANKS called up his bill [H. R. 389] that the wife, widow and minor child shall be entitled in the order named to the same rights of exemption of personal and real property, owned by the late husband or father, as the case may be, living, or if dead, having at the time of his decease been a resident householder, from sale or execution or other final process from a court, based upon or growing out of the tort or torts of the husband, late husband or father, that is, at the time such exemption is demanded, allowed by law to the debtor under legal proceeding, for the collections of any liability growing out of or founded upon a contract: expressed or implied, which was read the third time and passed the House by--yeas 65, nays 8.
Mr. BRYANT called up his bill [H. R. 624] to amend sections 103 and 101 of an act to provide for a general system of common schools, etc., which was read the third time.
On the motion of Mr. WORKS the bill was laid on the table.
Mr. JOHNSON introduced a bill, [H. R. 701] regulating the salaries of judges and members of the General Assembly, which was read the first time and passed to the second reading.
The bill, [S. 12] concerning the trial of civil causes in the circuit and superior courts, was read the third time.
Mr. WILLARD opposed the passage of the bill from the fact that he had experience in the Kentucky courts where such a law was In force, and knew its defects.
Mr. WORKS thought this was a good bill, and as the administration of justice in Kentucky did not cost more than one-third of what it does in other States, he thought their example might be followed in this, at least.
Mr. Herod was also inclined to indorse this bill, and hoped the House would pass it.
Mr. SLEETH was of the opinion that thia bill should pass, as it was a great improvement, and it would save much time, expense and wind.
Mr. MARCH thought it would compel the lawyers to argue the case twice or three times over, when once ought to be enough. He would vote against the bill.
The bill then passed the House by yeas 55, nays 27.
Mr. CONNOR submitted the report of the
On the motion of Mr. OVERMEYER, the report was received and the committee discharged.
On the motion of Mr. SHANKS, a new
The SPEAKER made such committee to consist, of Messrs. Shanks and Humphreys.
The bill [S. 353] supplemental to an act concerning trusts and powers was read the third time.
Pending the consideration thereof, the House adjourned.
As usual, the minutes were not read.
Mr. WINTERBOTHAM, from the
Mr. BURRELL regarded this claim as unjust and improper.
Mr. WOOD was surprised to see this bill brought in at this time of the session. He thought the sum too great.
Mr. HEFRON was willing to trust the justness and fairness of the people of the State in this matter. The Legislature has had the use of these rooms, consumed the gas, water and coal, and it is only right that the people at large should pay for it.
Mr. LANGDON did not think the opponents of this resolution knew what they were talking about. All the county of Marion offered the State was two rooms. It is as little as the State can do to pay for the gas, coal and water, as she would have to do if she occupied her own building.
Mr. WINTERBOTHAM said there was no reason in asking Marion county to furnish coal, gas and water for the Legislature without cost to the State.
Under the operations of the previous question, demanded by Mr. TRUSLER, the resolution was adopted by yeas 36, nays 8.
Mr. SHIRK asked leave to change his vote from. "no" to "aye," on the adoption of the report of the conference committee yesterday on the fee and salary bill.
Objection being made--
Mr. KENT moved that the Senator have leave to change his vote.
Mr. LEEPER said if leave be granted the senator, he also would change his vote from "aye" to "no."
The yeas and nays on the motion for leave to change the vote, were demanded by Messrs, TRAYLOR and SHAFFER, and being ordered they were taken. [The tallies showed yeas 32, nays 10.]
Pending the roll call--
Mr. SHIRK in explanation, when his name was called said, the Senate was required to vote upon the report of the conference committee on the fee and salary bill without members knowing what was in it. At the time, he desired the report should be laid on the table that opportunity might be afforded to examine it. Since then he was more favorably disposed toward it, and while it does nec suit him in many particulars, still he desired to change his vote from "no" to "aye."
Mr. TAYLOR, when his name was called, in explanation of his vote said, he came up here very desirous to help enact a fee and salary bill. This bill reported by the conference committee was thrust upon the Senate without giving an opportunity to investigate its provisions, but as far as he can learn if there had been an opportunity to investigate it, he should have voted as he did vote against it believing it will not meet the expectations of the people.
When the roll-call was completed--
The LIEUTEANT GOVEROR ruled, inasmuch as objection was made to the proposed change in the vote cast yesterday by the senator from Henry, [Mr. Shirk] he can not have it altered upon the record.
Mr. LEEPER, rising to a personal explanation, said he voted on yesterday in favor of concurring in the report of the joint conference committee on the fee and salary bill under a misapprehension of its character. He asked for unanimous consent to change his vote from "aye" to "no," because he now understands the bill as adopted by the committee of conference and concurred in by the Senate increases the fees of officers in the larger counties, while it diminishes them in the smaller counties, which is just the very thing he did not want to do.
Mr. TRAYLOR and others objected.
On motion by Mr. MENZIES the Senate proceeded to the consideration of House bills on the third reading, Mr. REEVES making an ineffectual motion to substitute Senate bills on second reading.
The bill [H. R. 467] to amend section 18 of the act regulating descents and the apportionment of estates was read the third time.
Mr. MENZIES explained this bill as he did yesterday.
Mr. TRAYLOR believed this bill would provoke litigation between brothers and sisters.
Mr. REEVE suggested if widows would make conveyance of the realty before a subsequent marriage there would be no need for the bill.
Mr. HARRIS regarded this as a wholesome measure, and believed it ought to prevail.
Mr. OLDS thought it would but tend to make confusion, and ought not to pass.
The bill was passed by ayes 30, nays 9.
The bill [H. R. 549] to amend section 5 of an act to provide for the more speedy trial of causes, with reference to the compensation of called judges, was read the third time.
Mr. REEVE pointed out objections to the bill. He could not conceive of any possible state of facts that would render such a bill necessary.
Mr. BURRELL said the object of the bill was to deduct the per diem of a special judge from the salary of the regular judge. While not satisfied with the bill in some particulars, he favored it as being the best that could be passed this session.
The bill finally passed by yeas 32. nays 5.
The bill [H. R. 608] for the relief of Aaron Coombs and others, security on the bond of a defaulting township trustee in Center township, Greene county, was read the third time and passed by yeas 28, nays 11.
Mr. HEFRON, explaining: The tax payers of the township are asking that the bill be passed.
The bill [H. R. 589] to authorize a township trustee of Union township, Union county, to pay certain indebtedness incurred by a former trustee, was read the third time and passed, by yeas 35, nays 3.
Mr. TRUSLER explaining its provisions and urging its passage in a short speech.
The bill [H. R. 310] to allow sheriffs and constables to follow defendants with a State warrant into an adjoining county and make arrest was read the third time and passed, by yeas 37, nays 0.
The bill [H. R. 560] for the relief of John J. Justice and others, securities on the bond of a defaulting trustee of Madison county, being read the third time--
Mr. SMITH explained the bill. The money was deposited in a bank which failed, though previous to depositing it the trustee had tried to loan it. It belonged to the township, and almost every tax payer in that township has petitioned this Legislature for relief in the matter, and he hoped the bill would pass.
The bill finally passed by yeas 31, nays 6.
Mr. TRAYLOR, when his name was called, addressing the chair as "your honor," and senators as 'gentlemen of the jury," voted "no," with the suggestion that if every senator represented a defaulting trustee who should be relieved in this way, what would become of the State of Indiana?
The bill [H. R. 115] to amend section 1 of an act for the protection of the Sabbath--so as to allow barbers to shave customers on the Lord's day--being read a third time--
Mr. SHAFFER opposed the bill, not believing there should be special legislation in favor of barbers as a class, any more than for any other particular business.
Mr. FOWLER could see no impropriety in passing the bill. It will not interfere with the Sabbath, or any one desiring to attend public worship. It is almost an absolute necessity that the bill should pass.
Mr. KAHLO hoped the bill would not pass.
Mr. SHIRK also hoped the bill would not pass. There is no more reason why a barber should pursue his usual avocation on Sunday than any other class. It would be granting a special privilege that is denied to others.
Mr. FOSTER favored the bill. Under the present law a great many barber shops keep open. Those able to pay fines keep open, while the poorer barbers do not.
Mr. REEVE made a humorous speech in support of the bill.
Mr. KRAMER thought this bill ought to pass. The principal result of the present law is to bring about malicious prosecutions. For this and other reasons it should be amended.
Mr. WINTERBOTHAM was born in the old State of Connecticut, where they once had the blue laws. Yet in that State they have never got close enough to prevent a barber shop from being open on Sunday.
Mr. VIEHE thought this bill ought to pass.
Mr. WIER saw no more impropriety in allowing barber shops to be kept open than allowing livery stable owners to keep their stock running on Sunday.
The bill failed to pass by yeas 22, nays 23.
Mr. GARRIGUS introduced a bill [S. 460] relating to tax sales where the sale is illegal or void--purchaser to have only 10 per cent. damages and legal interest--which was read the first time. He moved for a dispensation of the constitutional provision, that the bill may be pressed forward to its passage, pending, which--
On motion of Mr. VIEHE it was referred to the
Then came the recess till 2 o'clock.
On motion by Mr. SARNIGHAUSEN his bill [S.460] in relation to laying out, vacating and widening of streets, alleys, etc., introduced yesterday and referred to a committee without reading, was now read the first time, and under a dispensation, the second time by title only for the second reading.
On motion by Mr. TRAYLOR the bill [H. R. 115] to regulate the practice of dentistry in the State of Indiana, was read the second time.
Mr. GRUBBS, from the second committee of conference on the disagreements between the two Houses on the bill [H. R. 22] for an exemption law, submitted a report making the amount of exemption $600 instead of $1,00O, as in the original bill. The report was concurred in.
On motion of Mr DICE the bill [H. R. 630] regulating the presentation of claims before county commissioners, was read the second time.
Mr. REEVE, from the
On motion by Mr. MOORE, the Senate proceeded to the consideration of House bills on the third reading.
The bill [H. R. 158] in relation to settlements made between county commissioners and county, township or school officers, was read the third time, and, under the operations of the previous question, demanded by Mr. MOORE, it was passed by--yeas 28, nays 16.
The bill [H. R. 477] defining burglary, burglarious trespass and house breaking was read the third tune,
Mr. REEVE explained: This bill is substantially as it came from the House, although a substitute therefor, House breaking in the night time is declared to be burglary; in the day time burglarious trespass.
The bill was passed by yeas 38, nays 0.
The bill [H. R. 192] to legalize the
incorporation and each and every official act of each
The bill [H. R. 621] to localize the assesment and levy of taxes made by the city of Kendallville, was read the third time and passed by yeas 32, nays 2.
The bill [H. R. 290] to amend section one of the act concerning the running at large of animals in townships, was read the third time.
Mr. DICE thought this bill would be impracticable ia its operations, as it admits of stock on one side of a railroad running at large and will not admit of that, on the other side of the track.
Mr. BURRELL regarded this as drawing it down pretty line. If there is a stream cutting off one corner of a township it, would allow those on one side to enjoy certain rights, those on the other side may not.
Mr. WOOD explained: The county commissioners, under this bill, may grant privileges to a part of a township, divided by a railroad or a river--it simply extends the power of county commissioners to regulate the running at large of stock in a part of a township, instead of in a whole township, as now.
Mr. REEVE spoke in favor of the bill.
It failed to pass by yeas 23, nays 18.
On motion by Mr. HEFRON the vote by which the specific appropriation bill was passed was reconsidered, and, on motion by Mr. Traylor, it was referred to a select committee of three, which the lieutenant governor made to consist of Messrs. Leeper and Traylor. The committee reported instanter an amendment to the bill--section 35, an emergency clause--the report was concurred in, and the bill. again finally passed the Senate by yeas 31, nays 1.
The bill [H. R. 32] in relation to prosecutions of felonies by affidavits and information, in certain cases, was read the third time and passed by--yeas 28, nays 12.
The bill [H. R. 420] for the relief of Alex. V. Ingalls, a defaulting trustee in Madison county, was read the third time.
Mr. SMITH stated that this bill is of the same character as the bill he explained ear Her in the day. It is a meritorious measure, and he trusted it would pass the Senate.
It was finally passed by--yeas 26, nays 11.
The bill [H. R. 286] to amend an amendatory act concerning coroners--to abolish coroner's juries--was read the third time and passed by--yeas 29, nays 8.
On motion by Mr. VIEHE, the bill [H. R. 527] for the relief of John W. Starner and others, sureties for a defaulting trustee, was read the first time.
Mr. VIEHE explained its provisions, and on his motion the constitutional rule was set aside, the bill read the second time by title only, the third time by sections, and passed by yeas 35, nays 1.
Mr. REEVE moved to take up Senate bills on the second reading.
Mr. BRISCOE moved to amend by taking up the bill [H. R. 58] concerning attorney's fees in notes, etc., which motion was laid on the table by yeas 28, nays 9.
The motion [Mr. Reeve's] was agreed to.
The bill [S. 91--Mr. Moore's] to amend section 456 of the general practice act, the plaintiff as often as he direct may have a reappraisement at any time before the return of execution, was read the second time, and under a dispensation of the constitutional restriction the third time, and passed by--yeas 28, nays 9.
The bill [S. 147--Mr. Grubbs'] to amend sec. 3 of the act to provide for the inspection of petroleum oil for illuminating purposes, was read the second time, and under a dispensation the third time, and passed by yeas 41, nays 1.
Mr. BRISCOE moved again to take up the bill H. R. 58, but the presiding officer [Mr. Kent in the chair] decided the motion out of order, it having been laid on the table but a few minutes ago.
Mr. STREIGHT introduced a bill [S. 461] to amend sec. 1 of the act touching foreign corporations, restricting their bringing suits against citizens of Indiana, which was read the first time.
On motion by Mr. DICE, the bill was rejected--yeas 29, nays 11.
Mr. MENZIES moved to reconsider the vote just taken, and lay that motion on the table.
The latter motion was agreed to.
The bill [S. 262--Mr. Wilson's] to amend sec. 2 of the act in relation to county auditors--concerning their bond--was read the second time.
Mr. WILSON urged the necessity of the immediate passage of this bill. The present bond required of county auditors is insufficient. He moved for a dispensation of the constitutional restriction that the bill may be pressed to its final passage now.
Mr. TAYLOR also thought this a measure that ought to be pressed, as the bond of $2,000 is uniform in the largest as well as in the smallest county of the State.
Mr. KRAMER could see no necessity for requiring a heavy bond of the county auditor--there should be no bond higher than $15,000.
Mr. REEVE explained the bond under this bill should be only equal to the largest amount of money in the hands of the treasurer at one time.
Mr. STREIGHT favored the passage of the bill.
It was passed by yeas 36, nays 5.
On motion by Mr. SARNIGHAUSEN the message from the House relating to the bill [H. R. 620] to provide for a general system of common schools was taken up.
The House concurs in the Senate amendment making county superintendents elective by the county commissioners.
Mr. MENZlES moved that the Senate do recede from all amendments in which the House of Representatives refuses to concur.
Mr. URMSTON urged the Senate to adhere to its amendment allowing the patrons of a school to select its own teacher.
The motion to recede was agreed to by yeas 35, nays 5.
And then the Senate adjourned.
The morning session was opened with prayer by Mr. DAVIS, representative from the county of Boone.
The reading of the minutes was omitted.
The SPEAKER, by consent of the House, added to the committee on enrollment Messrs. Fancher and Dailey.
The business pending at the time of the adjournment last night being the consideration of the bill [S. 353] concerning trusts and powers, which had been read the third time, it now failed to pass the House for want of a constitutional majority--yeas 42, nays 37.
Mr. Johnson's bill [H. R. 701] fixing the per diem of members of the General Assembly and the salaries of the judges of the several courts of this State, and--
Mr. Watson's bill [H. R. 700] to ascertain the amount of fees and salaries or officers therein named, were severally read the second time, ordered engrossed and passed to the third reading.
Mr. EDWINS introduced a bill [H. R. 702] for an act in relation to enrolling the acts of the General assembly, which was read the third time and passed to the second reading.
The bill [S. 16] in reference to change of venue in cases of preliminary examination for felonies before justices of the peace, etc., was read the third time and failed to pass the House for want of a constitutional majority--yeas 42, nays 32.
The bill [S. 71] authorizing justices of the peace to require additional replevin bail in cases where insufficient bail has been taken, etc., was read the third time.
Mr. WATSON was opposed to the passage of this bill. Where the defendant is not in fault it places upon him additional cost. It is the duty of the justice to see that the bail is good, and by failing to do so he involves the defendant in additional expense and litigation. The remedy would be to issue the execution upon the affidavit of the plaintiff.
Mr. BRIGGS was in favor of the bill. It would have a tendency to compel the defendant to procure bail that was sufficient.
Mr. MARCH paid the defendant was the man responsible for the bail, and it was the intention of this bill to hold him responsible during the stay that he gets.
The bill then passed, the House by yeas 67, nays 10.
The Senate concurrent resolution authorizing the payment of $1,118 to the county of
Marion for coal, gas, use of furniture, rooms, etc., was referred to the
The bill [S. 47] to enable owners of wet lands to drain the same, etc., was read the third time and
On the motion of Mr. KIRKPATRICK the bill was indefinitely postponed.
The bill [S. 427] legalizing the acts of the board of trustres of the town of Washington, in the county of Wayne, was read the third time, and finally passed, the House by yeas 58, nays 16.
The bill [S. 55] to legalize the incorporation of the Kokomo building, loan, fund and. saving association of Kokomo, was read the third time and passed the House by yeas 60, nays 10.
The bill [S 79] to secure more efficient work and material in performance of contracts for public works, and to prohibit officials from being in any manner interested therein other than as an official, etc., was read the third time and failed to pass the House by yeas 32, nays 42.
Mr. FAULKNER said being a believer in the Bible, and as that teaches us we are all brethren, he moved--ineffectually--that the bill be indefinitely postponed.
The bill [S. 427] to amend sections one and two of an act regulating public warehouses, inspecting and mixing grains, etc., was read the third time and passed the House by yeas 64,nays 8.
The bill [S. 138] in relation to congressional township school funds, etc , was read the third time and passed the House by yeas 67, nays 3.
The Senate amendments to the bill [H. R. 620] for a codification of the common school bill being read.
On the motion of Mr. MIERS, the bill and Senate amendments was referred to a special committee of three.
The SPEAKER makes the committe to consist of Messrs. Miers, Overmeyer and Works.
Mr. DAVIS offered she following:
Whereas, An article published in the Indianapolis Journal of March 27, charging 25 or 30 members of the Legislature with such indignity as to bring disgrace upon the General Assembly and State of Indiana, by participating in a shameful orgie in a disreputable hall on East Washington street, and,
Whereas, The names of the participants are withheld from the public, thereby resting the odium equally and alike upon each member of the General Assembly; and,
Whereas, This Generaly Assembly, by the appointment of committees and otherwise, investigated the records of State officers runt justice might be brought to the line and justice to the plumet; therefore,
Resolved, That the editor of the Journal be, and is hereby requested to furnish to the public the name of each member of this General Assembly that participated in the disgraceful scene at Crone's Beer Garden, that the innocent may be exonerated and the odium fall where it belongs.
On the motion of Mr. WILLIARD, the resolution was postponed and made the special order for Monday next, at 10 o'clock,
The bill [S. 355] concerning trusts and powers, which failed this morning for want of a constitutional majority, was again called up and passed--by yeas 72, nays 5.
Mr. HEROD introduced a bill [H. R. 703] for an act to amend section 1 of an act entitled an act touching foreign corporations, and providing that certain acts thereof shall work, forfeiture, which was read the first time, and passed to a second reading.
Mr. SHANKS, from the committee on conference on the bill [H. R. 22] for a homestead: exemption, submitted that they had compromised by allowing an exemption of $600 in either real or personal, as the party claiming: such exemption may select.
Then came the recess until 2 o'clock.
The report of the
Mr. OVERMEYER offered a resolution that no bills on their final passage, nor any resolution to pay any one. will be acted upon in thia House after 12 o'clock noon on Saturday, March 29,1879.
On motion of Mr. LEHMAN, the resolution was made the special order for to-morrow at 10 o'clock.
Mr. CARTER called up the bill [S. 374] to alter and amend the charter of the town of Clarksville, when--
On the motion of Mr. LEHMAN, the bill was laid on the table--affirmative 37, negative 29.
Mr. HESS moved to reconsider the vote by which the bill was laid on the table.
Mr. LEHMAN moved to lay the motion to reconsider on the table.
The yeas and nays were demanded, and being ordered and taken resulted, yeas 38, nays 41, so the House refused to lay the latter motion on the table.
The motion to reconsider was then rejected by yeas 39, nays 42.
Mr. JOHNSON moved ineffectually--yeas 43, nays 31--for a suspension of the constitutional rule in order to take up the bill, H. R. 701, and put it up on its passage.
Mr. DAVIDS0N called up his bill [H. R. 10] to exempt from execution insurance claims and interests of the wives, children and dependents of members of masonic and other charitable institutions.
Mr. DAVIDSON, explaining, said this bill prohibits life Insurance policies from execution, and permits suits to be brought against the societies wherever they may have an agent.
The bill then passed the House by yeas 70, nays 0.
Mr. ENGLISH called up bis bill [H. R. 564] to legalize the official acts of the
board of trustees of the town of Woodruff Place, in
The Senate amendments to the bill [H. R. 158] in relation to settlements made by boards of county commissioners with county, township and school officers, being read--
Mr. SHANKS insisted that if this bill is passed, it would open the door for endless litigation. It should be a general law, and not an act intended to apply to but one or two cases, and he objected to it because it would allow either party to open investigation by suit of the other.
Mr. MARCH said if there were no defaulting county officers in the State this bill would not hurt any one. No man in Indianapolis had spoken to him with reference to it before it had been introduced. It was introduced to prevent fraud, and not in any particular local interest.
Mr. THAYER thought this bill was gotten up to fit some particular case. As a business principle he believed that when a settlement had been made it should stand unless fraud could be proven. As he understood it he was opposed to it.
Mr. WORKS thought this was a bill in which, the whole Stats was interested, and he wanted this law to apply to his county. If a man had defrauded his county that man ought to be made to pay back the money so fraudulently taken. He thought it was competent to pass a bill by which the county could receive back any money fraudulently taken from it.
Mr. HEROD thought that this Senate amendment was put in to fit a certain case in which certain parties desire to cover up fraud.
Mr. TAYLOR of Daviess,could not see any good and valid reason to oppose this bill. He did not caro whether Democrats or Republicans were angeled, he wanted all to disgorge Who had fraudulently taken the public funds.
The Senate amendments way then concurred in by yeas 62, nays 27.
Pending the roll call--
Mr. ARNOLD of Grant, when his name was called, said the people of Grant county, so far as he knew, were in favor of this bill, and if there was any opposition to it it comes from the county officers.
The Senate amendments to the bill [H. R. 477] to define the crime of burglary and house breaking, were read, and concurred in.
Mr. CALDWELL called up Mr. Briggs' bill [H. R. 697] for a more speedy determination of causes of actions in the circuit and superior courts, which was read the third time and finally passed the House by yeas 70, nays 1.
Mr. HUBBARD, from a majority of the committee appointed a to investigate the benevolent institutions presented their report, as follows:
Charge first against Dr. Jameson, corresponding to charge six against Dr. Everts-- making expenditures of money received for work and labor, products and earnings of the institutions, charged to be in violation of the act of March 10, 1875. [Acts Reg. Sess. 1875, p. 5.)
To the Hon. H. S. Cauthorn, Speaper of the House of Representatives:
The undersigned, Exum Saint, Charles S. Hubbard and J. H. Thornburg, on the part of the House committee to Investigate the charges again Patrick H. Jameson, president of the board of benevolent institutions, and against Dr. Everts, superintendent of the Hospital for the Insane, beg leave to submit the following report:
First--As to the matters and specifications set forth in charge first, above set out, we say that the testimony does not show any illegal expenditure of money by Dr. Jameson, received for work and labor and products and earnings of the Institute for the Blind, or of the Asylum for the Deaf and Dumb, but as far as said charge relates to the Hospital for the Insane, and affects Drs. Everts and Jameson in connection therewith, we are of the opinion that, although their manner of accounting for money received, and for work and labor performed, and for the products and earnings of the farm connected with said hospital, is much the same as that of previous managements; and, although the testimony does not show that any of the money or proceeds derived from the sources above mentioned have been misappropriated or misapplied, yet the books and accounts of this institution are kept in such a manner that said funds are not kept separate and distinct, so as to show the amount received from the various sources, and how and in what manner accounted for, as they should be. We think there should be a full and strict account kept of each fund, that the books should show in detail the amount received from the earnings of the hospital, from labor, from the different farm product", etc., and show how, when and by whom expended.
Charge two against Dr. Jameson (not affecting Dr. Everts)--that he received additional pay as a member of the provisional board, etc.
As to the second clurrg0 against Dr. Jameson, and not affecting Dr. Everts, which is that said Jameson received a large sum of money for pay as a member of the provisional board contrary to law, we say that said charge is not sustained by the evidence.
The testimony shows that Dr. Jameson received $40O per year as treasurer of the provisional board for his services in drawing and paying out the sum of $225,000 in the construction of the new Hospital for the Insane. While the law does not specifically authorize said board to appoint a treasurer for the disbursement of so large a fund, yet it does provide for the salary of certain other officers and agents, provided the board see proper to appoint them, and it nowhere prohibits the appointment of a treasurer or limits the board in providing the necessary means for carrying out the purpose for winch the board was created. If the board, which is an entire different body from the board of commissioners of Insane Asylum, although composed in part of the same men, deemed the magnitude of the work sufficient to justify the creation of the office of treasurer at a salary of $400 per annum, and had confidence in one of their number for that place, we do not feel justified in censuring them for their action when there is no law forbidding the exercise of such power on their part. It will be further remembered that the board was comprised of such men as Governors Williams, Hendricks, Jameson, etc., who, with the exception of one member, served without pay.
We will say, however, that in view of the fact that the law only authorized the payment of S300 to the secretary of the board, that amount might more properly have been taken as the compensation for the treasurer. And as a further reason for our opinion in this case we mention that the testimony does not bring out any fraud or intention to defraud the State.
Charge three against Dr. Jameson, corresponding to charge two against Dr. Everts employment of relatives, charged to be in violation of the act of February 25,1875. (Acts Reg. Sess., '75, p. 108.)
As to the specifications in this charge, we say that, as far as they relate
to the employment of Miss Churchman, Miss Maclntire and Mrs. Everts, they are
sustained by the evidence, and, while there is a difference of opin-[ion]
As to the employment of young Everts, Thomas and another person, relatives of some of the members of the board, in the painting and construction of the new Asylum for women, we fail to find any law forbidding it in letter or spirit, and are sustained in this opinion by eminent legal authority.
And there was not sufficient evidence to convince us that the State was in any way the loser thereby.
Charge four against Dr. Jameson [not affecting Dr. Everts]--that he has received as president of the boards of benevolent institutions salary in excess of the $500 provided by the act of March 12, 1875.
This charge is made against Dr. Jameson only, and the act he is charged with violating is superseded, or in effect repealed, by the act of the special session of the Legislature of 1877, page 6, section 11, which provides that the president of the benevolent institutions shall receive the sum of $300 per annum for each of the three institutions under his control, and the testimony does not show more than that amount of salary paid to him during any one year for services as president of said board. Therefore we think the charge is not sustained.
Charge five against Dr. Jameson, corresponding to Charge three against Dr. Everts--employment of extravagant and useless labor.
This charge against said Jameson, corresponding to the third charge against Dr. Everts, is sustained as to both or as to either of them, only in this, viz: the un contradicted testimony of one or two witnesses that Miss _____ was employed and occupied solely in sewing and fancy work for the family of said Dr. Everts for the space of years, at the expense of the State. This being admitted by the failure of the defense to offer any evidence contradicting it, we must, say that we do not think the obligation of the State to support the superintendent and his family can be extended to the employment of a seamstress or servants in a private capacity, and that the payment for such services by the State was unlawful.
Charge six against Dr. Jameson, corresponding to charge one against Dr. Everts--accepting gifts from tradesmen furnishing goods, etc., to the asylums, whereby they were influenced and rendered partial.
This charge against Dr. Jameson corresponds to the first charge against Dr. Everts, and, in our opinion, is unsustained by the testimony.
There was some testimony, and we believe not denied, that three cans of fruit were presented to Dr. Jameson by a tradesman of whom he made part of his purchases. It was also shown that a box of tea at one time, two or three dozen oranges and some other small items had been given and sent to Mrs. and Dr. Everts in trifling quantities and at divers times by parties who were furnishing supplies to the Asylum; also, a box of cigars when the legislative committee were visiting there on one or two occasions; but neither the amount or value of these presents, nor the manner of the transaction, nor even the testimony itself, show anything illegal or improper either in the giving or accepting.
Charge seven against Dr. Jameson, corresponding to charge four against Dr. Everts-- purchases at exhorbitant prices.
As to this charge against said Jameson, which corresponds to the fourth change against Dr. Everts, we say that the evidence does not sustain the charge, but that, on the other hand, the preponderance of testimony was to the effect that said Jameson was a cautious and discreet buyer, generally purchasing where lie could get, the best bargain; and not paying for goods or supplies any more than the market price.
The charge, however, in relation to Dr. Everts was sustained in particular instances, but not in general; it should be stated, however, that they were so sustained upon the uncontradicted testimony of the prosecution. Whether the defendant was unable to disprove them, or neglected to do so, is not for us to say. It was shown that he purchased a large bill of clothing from Heitkam & Co. at their own prices, and without making any personal examination of said goods at the time they were purchased. It was further shown that he had often purchased large bills of goods of the same firm, but it did not appear but what lie had exercised reasonable care in their selection, except on the occasion referred to.
While the evidence was not specific as to any other particular instances of want of care on the part of said Everts in the purchase of goods or supplies, yet we are of the opinion that there was an occasional lack of skill and watchfulness in the last year or two in the pus chase of goods and supplies.
Charge eight against Dr. Jameson, corresponding to same number against Dr. Everts making certificate of insanity before a board of inquest, and reccing into the Asylum a sane person (Gordon Grimth), to prevent criminal prosecution, etc.
In the matter of the inquest set forth in this charge we would simply say that innocence is presume until the contrary is proven; that where no self-interest or other impelling motive is shown, the evidence,to convict a man ' of even fair or average standing in society, of certifying to the insanity of a sane man, ought to be susceptible of no explanation, and reconcilable with no theory but that cf his guilt. Such was not the testimony. There was not even a preponderance, if we judge evidence by its value, against the accused or against Dr. Everts.
Charge nine against Dr. Jameson, not affecting Dr. Evarts--that Dr. Jameson, while ex- officio member of the provisional board for building the new Asylum for Insane Women drew sums of money aggregating $225,000 ($300,000), and placed it on deposit to his own credit, and received interest thereon which he applied to his private use, and refuses to account therefor.
This charge affects only Dr. Jameson, and we are of the opinion that if said money, appropriated for the construction of the new female department of the Asylum,had remained in the treasury and been drawn out by the provisional board or its agent as became necessary to pay contractors, employes, materialmen, etc , no interest would have been realized. It is in evidence that said money was drawn out, in manner and amounts as set forth in said charge, by said Jameson as treasurer of said board upon the order of said board, and deposited in certain banks of this city on interest; and that said interest amounted to $1,819, out of which the compensation of said treasurer was paid, and a balance of $419 placed to the credit of said fund, which last amount the State would not have received had said appropriation remained in the treasury and drawn out as needed.
While we may not in words justify this action, yet in view of the fad t hat
the State is not shown to be the loser thereby, and the matter was approved by
a board of men of
As to the legality of said Jameson receiving the salary of treasurer of said board,and which was deducted from said interest, we have given our opinion under charge.
Charge 10 against Dr. Jameson (corresponding to charge seven against Dr. Everts)publishing false statements and statistics for the purpose of deceiving, etc.
About all the testimony adduced on this subject or charge was the report submitted to the regular session of the General Assembly for the expenditures of the Blind Asylum for the year 1878, which showed that the cost of subsistence per capita, for each mouth in the year, estimating upon the basis of 50 weeks in the year, was $6.27, while the evidence showed that the pupils were kept in said institution but 40 weeks in the year. The only effect of this record is to mislead as to the actual cost per month for subsisting each pupil in said institution, there being no evidence to show that any of the money for the support of said Blind Asylum had been unaccounted for or misappropriated. We are of the opinion that the proper plan would be for said reports to disclose the actual cost of subsisting each inmate for the actual time he or she may have been provided for in said institution. There being no further evidence as to false or improper entries, or showing in said reports, we dismiss this charge with the finding and recommendation above made.
Charge 11 against Dr. Jameson, corresponding to charge five against Dr. Everts-- permitting incurable patients to remain in the Insane Asylum, receiving money on account of such incurables, and discharging curable patients as incurable.
As to this charge, we do not find from the evidence that incurable patients have been permitted to remain in said Hospital to the exclusion or detriment of curable patients. There is evidence, however, of donations to the Asylum by the relatives of inmates therein, but the defendants claim, that they have accounted for all such money, and their reports show that money has often been so received and how the same was expended. As to further findings on this subject, see that part of our report under charge No. 2 of this report.
There was testimony, un contradicted by the defense, that one Gavin paid the superintendent, Dr. Everts, the sum of $300, whereas his report of the donations to the Hospital shows only $200 paid by said Gavin; and there was the further testimony that one Goodwin (we believe that was she name) had donated the sum of ------, whereas the evidence of accused and the report of said Everts show the payment of $75 or $100 less than that amount.
As a portion of said payments were made, or at least one of them, only last fall, it may be that a future report may account for the difference, but your committee have reported the facts as they found them.
Charge 12 against Dr. Jameson, corresponding to charge nine against Dr. Everts--keeping boobs in a loose and uncertain manner.
As to that part of this charge which relates to the keeping and manner of keeping the books of the Asylum in such a way as is calculated to deceive the public or mislead them, we affirm that the charge is not sustained by the evidence. And as to whether they have been kept in a business-like manner as they should be, or not, we refer to the opinion expressed under charge first against Dr. Jameson, corresponding to sixth against Dr. Everts.
We will say here that we have made no personal examination of the books, and our opinion is based upon the testimony, on admission of accused, and a casual reference to said books, or a portion of them, and the expert testimony. We can not say further, unless time and opportunity had been accorded the accused to bring in their entire books and accounts and explain them, which was denied because time was too short.
Charge thirteen against Dr. Jameson, (not affecting Dr. Everts)--suffering and approving purchases for the Blind Asylum from Churchman, its superintendent
As to this charge, which only affects Mr. Jameson, we have to say that. there only ap-. pears to have been two or three small bills purchased of said Churchman, and the practice thou discontinued. It does not appear that the State lost anything by these transactions. We certainly should condemn such purchases were they in vogue, or had been to any considerable extent.
Charge 14 against Dr. Jameson, corresponding to charge 10 against Dr. Everts--general charge of irregularities and abuses.
Under this general charge there was no evidence adduced, in fact, no attempt on the part of the prosecution to connect either Drs. Jameson or Everts personally and directly with any of the charges preferred but only as they were accountable for neglect of duty and bad conduct of subordinate officers and attendants.
The point upon which the prosecution mainly relies in support of this charge
is the alleged neglect of duty, malpractice or professional ignorance of Dr.
Hester, an assistant physician, in the treat me 111 of one Mrs. Williams who
died at the hospital; in this, that the said Hester either ignorantly or
purposely made an improper and false diagnosis of the malady of this patient,
and treated her for troubles arising from uterine disorders, when in fact she
was suffering from nervous prostration, debility, etc., incident to pregnancy,
and prescribed for her accordingly,which said treatment,together with certain
unusual hardships imposed upon her by the order of said Hester, notably
pushing the rubber, brought about a miscarriage, from the effects of which,
and inattention when in labor, she died. From certain testimony, introduced by
both parties, it was shown that this patient had, on her first commitment to
the hospital, been treated by Hester for 10 months; that she was of a stupid,
listless and unobservant disposition, and would remain standing against the
wall or in a sitting posture, entirely unconcered and indifferent as to what
was taking place around her, for an indefinite space of time, unless compelled
by the attendants to change her position. That she simulated the usual
symptoms of pregnancy, even to the swollen condition or appearance of the
parts; was greatly constipated, unless something was constantly given to
prevent it, and had no appetite for food. It was further shown that under
pretense of trying to improve her by change of scene and surroundings, and
frequent enjoyment of fresh air and sunlight, her husband obtained leave to
take her into the city to live, and it is shown that she was returned to the
hospital, after about two weeks, with but little apparent improvement, and it
is further shown by the landlady, who furnished them a room during her said
stay in the city, that she and her husband occupied the same bed. Here the
testimony diverges; the witnesses for the prosecution claiming that upon her
return she was subjected to unusual hardship; that the attendants were n
required by Dr. Hester to keep her constantly ai some exercise, principally
pushing the "rubber" that is
On the other hand, the accused himself testifies, and he is corroborated by the evidence of one or two others in many respects, that when Mrs. Williams returned to the hospital, and, for that matter, when she left with her husband, her mental and physical condition was such as to preclude all suspicion or thought of any man having sexual intercourse with her; that her symptoms and apparent condition were almost the same as before she left (and in this he is corroborated by Dr. Parvin); that, having failed to make much improvement by his former treatment, he abandoned it in a great measure, using occasionally a tonic and some preparations to produce a laxity of the bowels; and, for the purpose of diverting her attention, and preventing her proneness to listlessness and stupidity, he directed the attendants to keep her reasonably occupied with the rubber or other devices. He avers that, under the circumstances, he never suspected pregnancy, neither did either of the attendants, who are the main witnesses against him (the two who were in charge of said patient) ever communicate their suspicions to him, and it was their duty, no says, to inform him of any change that may or ought to take place. He denies that he was called more than once, and that he then responded as promptly as he could, and 'within three minutes of being so notified, and in this he is corroborated by at least one other witness. He further says in relation to the unexpected confinement of said patient, that if said attendants had been attending to their duty, he would have been called at a much earlier stage of this trouble. He further says that he did all in his power to alleviate the condition of said patient, and prescribe just such treatment after the bringing forth of said foetus, as the symptoms of said patient seemed to demand. And he avers that he left nothing undone that his experience and the usual practice in such cases suggested should be done to insure her recovery, if the same was possible. He further testifies, and a this he is borne out by the evidence of Dr. Everts and others that there was no attempt at concealment of this transaction either on his part or that of the officers and attendants of said institution, further than was customary to prevent the inmates from learning that anything unusual had taken place, and that much is necessary on account of their natural and proverbial tendency to excitement and misconstruction of everything that they do not readily understand, or that will afford them an opportunity to create a sensation.
Now in this connection your committee would mention a few facts that may be of value in determining the value of the testimony. They concede that while the interest of Drs. Everts and Hester should be kept in view in deciding what weight should be given to their evidence, yet in very many of the main points of their testimony they were corroborated by a number or witnesses, mostly from the Insane Hospital, who certainly know that the accused no longer have any power to retain them in the employment they now have, as there has already been, or is about to be, an entire change in the management of the institution, and the declaration by some of them that they came voluntarily, without subpoena, to testify for the accused, because they thought he was being unjustly assailed and the victim of spite and revenge, ought rather to strengthen than weaken their testimony. While on the other hand, there was not a material witness against Dr. Hester that did not acknowledge there was a bad feeling on their part against him, which was very evident, from their willingness to testify and their proneness to step aside and give him a thrust that savored more of jealousy than a desire to do even-handed justice. And one very significant fact of more than ordinary importance in this connection, is that the very witnesses whose evidence is intended to sustain this charge, both repeatedly swore that up to within the last 18 months, and during the long years of his connection with said institution, Dr. Hester had been uniformly kind, patient and attentive to the inmates under his charge, and, though strict in the enforcement of discipline among the attendants, yet courteous and just to them they could not recall an instance of bad treatment or lack of duty on his part until the time before mentioned.
Your committee feel at a loss just how to ex plain the fact that a man who,
upon the testimony of both sides, had been so entirely devoted to the
interests of the institution and the welfare of the inmates during a period
that ante-dates in its commencement even the beginning of Dr. Everts' term of
office could suddenly, and within the last 18 months, commence a system of
cruelty to those under his charge that has no equal in the annals of the most
uncivilized and barbarous tribes. Just how far this testimony of these female
attendants can be explained by the fact that Dr. Hester, who was very popular
up to the time referred to, introduced in the Hospital a lady to assist him in
his arduous duties, and for whom he yet retains a deserved partiality, we do
not pretend to say; but we do insist that the charges of criminal neglect and
malpractice in three or tour cases by Dr. Hester are so inconsistent with his
former character for years, as shown by the witnesses for the prosecution,
that when taken in connection with the testimony of Dr. Everts that he was the
most attentive and devoted officer in the discharge of duty that he ever knew,
and well qualified for his place, and the additional testimony of Dr. Jameson
and others to the same effect, that it would be violating all rules of
evidence and establishing a precedent whereby the character and reputation of
almost every officer in charge of a large number of inmates of any public
institution might be irretrieveably blasted were we to say that said charge
was sustained by the evidence. We will say, however, that the failure of the
officers of the hospital to discover the pregnancy of Mrs. Williams,
notwithstanding the circumstances tending to mislead, and the fact that the
attendants were in a measure to blame, is, in our opinion, a case of
inexcusable neglect, and in that far affects, of course, the whole management
of the Institution. But we feel in duty bound to add that Dr. Hester, for want
of time, was denied any opportunity of offering evidence in his own defense,
which fact should go far in preventing an arbitrary judgment or verdict
against him. It will not do to say that he was protected because he was
allowed to testify, for when on the stand he was the witnesss of Dr Everts and
exam-[ined]
There was some evidence as to the confinement during the whole of one day of a feeble female patient in a bed room where there were two beds, and without fire in the winter time. Dr. Hester had no chance to defend on this point, and there were grave doubts from the testimony of the prosecution whether the officers, the attendants, or the patient herself, was most to blame. We say that the charge is unsustained on this point. The case of Mrs. Knapp, who suicided by hanging, is adduced as another case of neglect on the part of Hester and Everts, but the testimony does not sustain the charge.
The only other case considered of sufficient importance upon which to condemn a management of over 600 crazy people and 140 subordinates and attendants during a period of 12 years, is the inexcusable tantalizing of a nervous and flighty patient by the name of Mrs. Wheedon, which charge is also unsustained by the evidence of prosecution alone.
We close our report with the following general finding, supplemented by a few observations suggested by the investigation:
We are of the opinion that the discipline in the Insane Hospital for the last year or 18 months has been generally bad. How far that may be attributed to the prospect of a change of management to suit the political turn of affairs we can not say, but that the addition of one or two persons to the care and supervision of some of the female wards--which the management had a right to make, and did make about a year and a half ago--proved to be a serious disturbing element, which we think the management might have suppressed by a timely removal of the unruly ones, as we think; but this not being done, the bad feeling extended until for some time past there has been an unfortunate lack of harmony, respect for each other and laxity of discipline that should not exist in an institution where a common desire and unity of purpose and effort; is necessary to promote the efficiency of the Institution and the welfare of an unfortunate class of our fellow-citizens.
It is our opinion, however, that the accused, Drs. Everts and Jameson, have ever had sincerely at heart the welfare of this great and important public charity, and that, in a general way, have zealously striven to promote its efficiency, increase its usefulness, and make it the equal of any similar institution in the country. That they may have failed in particular instances to do the best we do not deny, but against that should be placed the magnitude of their responsibility, the character of the people with which they have had to deal, and the long period covered by their term of service--and we, perhaps, should refer to the fact that for two or three years past, in addition to their ordinary duties, they have had on their hands the construction of the new Asylum for Women, which must necessarily have engrossed much of the time that could illy be spared from the duties of the Asylum proper. We are of the opinion further, that with the most sensitive and sympathetic natures long continued service in these positions and long familiarity with physical and mental infirmities tends to breed indifference and blunt the sensibilities in regard to the wants and requirements of that class of people, and while we make no recommendation on that point, we submit whether or not a change of management ought not occur every few years, and for fear we might not all agree on that point we express no further opinion.
We now submit this tedious report with the remark that the defendants or accused should go acquit on any charge where they had not the opportunity to offer testimony in defense, and we are sorry to say that time did not permit a full and fair investigation on both sides, for each of them insist that they were cut off without a full and fair opportunity to make their case. However, as to many of the charges preferred, we think we have had sufficient evidence on which to base a correct opinion.
Mr. EDWINS from the minority of the committee submitted a minority report, as follows:
Your committee was appointed to investigate certain charges of irregularities against Dr. P. H. Jameson, president of the board of benevolent institutions, and Orpheus Everts, superintendent of the Hospital for the Insane. After as careful a consideration of the subject, as could possibly be given in the limited time allotted for that purpose, we find the evidence adduced on behalf of the parties concerned shows the following state of facts, clearly and beyond any doubt or question:
We find charge first sustained against Patrick H. Jameson in this: that he, the said Patrick H. Jameson, permitted and was directly instrumental in allowing money to be used unlawfully and without warrant of law, and in violation of act of March 10,1875, namely: that moneys received for the farm products and the products of the green-house were never turned into the treasury as the law directs, but expended in such manner as the management of the Insane Asylum saw fit, in direct contravention of all law on the subject,. without giving an itemized statement of how such moneys were expended. We also find that this same charge against Orpheus Everts has been sustained.
We further find that Patrick H. Jameson received extra salary as treasurer of the provisional board of commissioners for the new building for the Insane Hospital to the amount of $1,400, which, in the opinion of your committee, was entirely without warrant of law, and we believe the proper steps should be taken to cover the same back into the treasury. Such an office is unknown to the law.
The law of 1875 fixed said Patrick H. Jameson's salary, as president of all
the boards, at $500. The appropriation bill of 1877 (acts special session,
pages 5, 7) fixed it at $300 for each institution, or $900 in all; but we fail
to find any law where it authorizes the provisional
' We find that the employment of Miss Churchman, Miss MacIntire and Mrs. Mary Everts is not contrary to law, according to the opinion of the attorney general. Your committee does not find any law directly prohibiting the employment of relations, yet the practice of employing such is reprehensible, and would advise its discontinuance in the future.
This charge is, in the opinion of your committtee, substantially the same as charge second, and our finding herein is the same as in that charge against the respondent, Patrick H. Jameson.
In the employment of useless labor, we find that Orpheus Everts has had one Miss Harding in his employ as seamstress for several years, who has been constantly employed in exclusive work for said Everts and his family, the State deriving no benefit from said services, although she was paid by the State.
That Dr. Patrick H. Jameson received presents to Influence him in giving the trade of the institution to certain merchants and tradesmen. Your committee find that while there were several witnesses who swore to such having been the case, yet the evidence was so conflicting we are unable to come to any definite conclusion in the matter. We find, however, that such presents were received by Dr. inverts and his family, and we can not justify such a practice, no matter in what small amounts the presents may have been received.
In reference to goods bought, we find the preponderance of the evidence will show and does convince your committee, that Dr. Everts bought and paid at least retail prices for goods bought of William I. Kipley and H. H. Lee and Geo. H. Heitkam & Co., and although the goods were purchased in wholesale quantities, that if a more careful system of purchasing had been followed, a better class of goods could have been obtained at a much less rate, thereby saving considerable sums of money to the State. We find that the clothing was bought by order, and left to the merchant selling the goods to select the kind and quality and fix the prices. That such carelessness on the part of Dr. Everts, and neglect in not better protecting the State's interest, should meet from this Assembly the censure it justly deserves.
In relation to Gordon Griffith, the testimony is of such a vague character and of such a contradictory nature that we have failed to find either of the officers of the Insane Asylum guilty of anything censurable in the case.
In this, Dr. Jameson is charged with applying to his private use interest on the provisional board appropriation. We find that he did turn a small amount of such interest to his private account in bank, but subsequently changed it to its proper place in the State' funds.
That the reports of 1878 are incorrect; but in the case of the Blind Asylum, we find that the misrepresentation is due to an improper calculation. We also find that the per capita should not be calculated or the Deaf and Dumb and Blind Asylums for more than 40 weeks in the year, instead of 52 weeks, as is done in their printed reports.
This is in regard to donations to officers to influence the retention of certain parties,with the knowledge of Drs. Jameson and Everts; your committe find that donations to a large amount have from time to time been received by Dr. Everts, and that he has failed entirely to show any proper or legal authority by books, memoranda, or other proof how such funds were expended, and your committee have had no means of knowing whether incurable patients were maintained in the hospital and curable ones denied admittance. Such practices amount to gross neglect of duty and malfeasance, which can not be too strongly condemned by the General Assembly.
That the books were so kept as to mislead the public. We find no correct system of bookkeeping has been followed. The books at the Asylum have been kept in a very loose and bungling manner, and are unintelligible to such a decree that it is impossible to find in what manner the institution funds, gathered from the various sources, have been expended.
In the opinion of your committee too much censure can not be attached to the officers of an institution that have so conducted. their business.
That Dr. Jameson had goods purchased of W, H. Churchman, superintendent of the Blind Asylum. We find that such goods were purchased to a small amount, but very properly stopped by order of Dr. Jameson.
We find in the general charge in relation to cruelty and neglect to the
inmates of the Insane Asylum, that as a general charge this has not been
sustained: but we find that in exceptional cases the charge has been more than
sustained, notably in the case of Mrs. Knapp who was neglected in her room
until the hanged herself; also a Mrs. McDowel, who under the same
circumstances, committed a like deed, and in the case of Mrs. Ashland, who was
left, on a cold winter day, locked in a room without fire or food, and of Mrs.
Mary Harris, who was sick from April to July, and who received no treatment,
and who died from this neglect in the early part of August; and in the case of
Mrs. Williams, than which a greater case of professional ignorance or criminal
neglect, to put it in its mildest form;, was never display ed by any
professional man than by Dr. W. W. Hester, first assistant physician,in his
treatment of this case. We find this poor demented woman, an inmate of the
Insane Hospital for about eight or 1c months, under the care of Dr. Hester,
who treated her for suppressed menses, with what is known as Hooper's female
pill and a bitter tonic. Getting some better she went home for two weeks.
Returning at the end of that time, we find from the evidence of three credible
witnesses, that she was again placed under the same treatment, and continued
taking said pills, until she had taken 150 of the same. The menses never
returned. The woman kept getting larger weekly, according to Dr. Hester's own
evidence, and the attendants about the hospital called the attention of Dr.
Hester to her case, intimating that the woman was
We further find that even after the birth of the child, Dr. Hester continued an unheard of and unprofessional practice in carrying off the foetus and afterbirth, together with the bedclothing, to his dispensary, where he let it remain until it was discovered by its offensive odor. That he then placed the foetus in pickle and threw the afterbirth in the water closet, and afterward tired to burn the sheet, like a person who had committed a great crime and was trying to hide his guilt. Your committee have failed to find any cause for such conduct, or of such neglect and cruelty as this unfortunate created received, who was utterly incapable of helping herself. We do not know nor can we conceive of any cause why a medical officer of a public institution should stoop to the more than reprehensible practice of burning the bedclothing of a woman who had been delivered a child.
Your committee further find that Dr. Everts after having been notified of the fact, did not perform his duty by immediately discharging Dr. Hester for being guilty of such improper conduct, and that Dr. Everts is justly censurable for continuing him in office, and this approving his conduct.
We further find that the Asylum for the Insane has been in a state of demoralization for a number of years last past; the attendants and the officers continually clashing and forming "rings," thereby tending to demoralize the institution and destoy its efficiency. We find that no record of prescription is kept, and would recommend that a registry of all prescriptions be kept in the dispensary of the hospital. That unruly and meddlesome attendants be discharged. That the present medical officers, proven culpable, be discharged and a careful scrutiny be hereafter maintained by both the board of directors and the superintendent over the medical officers and other attendants, and see that said attendants treat the poor unfortunate people under their charge with that humanity and professional care that should actuate every one worthy the name of man
Your committee recommend the adoption of the following:
Resolved, That the evidence taken down in the investigation of the charges preferred against Patrick H. Jameson and Dr. Orpheus Everts by Daniel V. Hubbard be ordered printed in pamphlet form.
Resolved, That the board of commissioners of the Indiana Hospital of the Insane be requested to throughly examine all the books, vouchers and accounts of said hospital, during the term of Orpheus Everts; and further, that they inaugurate a system of accounts, which will clearly show the financial transactions of said institution.
Resolved, That Patrick H. Jameson and Orpheus Everts be and are hereby censured for malfeasance in their respective offices.
Resolved, That the attorney-general of the State is hereby requested to institute suit against Patrick H. Jameson for the recovery of $1,400 wrongfully appropriated by him as salary, and that said attorney general is hereby requested to take such steps to recover any sum or sums of money retained or appropriated by either Patrick H. Jameson or Orpheus Everts contrary to law.
The report were laid on the table until to-morrow, without reading.
Mr. ROBINSON called up his bill [H. R. 636] to amend section 15 of an act regulating elections, which was read the third time and passed the House by yeas 62, nays 8.
Mr. OVERMEYER, from the special committee to which was referred the common school bill [H. R. 620] reported that the committee had agreed to the Senate amendment allowing the trustee to select the teachers, but had disagreed to several others.
Mr. FANCHER objected to the House concurring in the report of the conference committee on the school law, especially to that part in which they recommend the continuation of the law as it now stands in regard to the trustees being allowed to select and employ the teacher, after it had already been decided by the House, by a large majority, that they preferred that the patrons of the district should select the teacher, and after the Senate had concurred therein. It was, in fact, allowing two or three men, by force of circumstances, to control the entire House and Senate, they well knowing the desire of the members to pass the bill, and, in order to do it, the House must concur in their report.
The report of the committee was then concurred in.
Mr. DAILEY called up Mr. Tulley's bill [H. R. 147] to enable married women, whose husbands are insane or incapacitated, to exercise the right of resident householders in having property exempted from execution or attachment, which was read the third time, and finally passed by--yeas 68, nays 0.
The House adjourned.
The minutes were not read--as usual.
Mr. STREIGHT moved to take up the library bill, [H. R. 568.]
Mr. REEVE made an ineffectual motion to substitute the bill [H. R. 89] regulating the power of courts to punish contempt.
On motion by Mr. SARNIGHAUSEN the Senate proceeded to the consideration of House bills on the third reading.
The bill [H. R. 105] to regulate the practice of dentistry, was read the third time.
Mr. TRAYLOR said this bill was for the protection of the people--a step in the right direction.
Mr. STREIGHT opposed all measures of this character. This bill requires a permit from a college of dentistry; (he knew of no such institution in this State), or a certificate issued by a Board of Examiners, to be appointed by the Indiana State Dental association. He hoped the bill would not pass.
The bill finally passed by yeas 26, nays 12.
The bill [H. R. 460] to amend section 2 of the act relating to opening, vacating and laying out of streets and highways, was read the third time and passed by yeas 30, nays 8.
Mr. SARNIGHAUSEN: This bill has been proposed by direction of the Common Council of the city of Fort Wayne. It is a measure much needed in cities. The bill [H. R. 2901 to amend section 1 of the act regulating the-running at large of animals in the various townships of this State, which heretofore failed to pass for want of a constitutional majority, was now passed by yeas 27, nays 15.
The bill [H. R. 630] to regulate the presentation of claims before county commissioners was read the third time and passed by yeas 39, nays 3.
Mr. DICE explained: Under this bill all such claims shall be first passed upon by the County Board before suit is commenced thereon in the courts.
Mr. GRUBBS moved to take up S. 370.
Mr. STREIGHT moved to amend by substituting House bills on the third reading.
Mr. LANGDON moved to amend the amendment by taking up Senate bills on the third reading.
On motion by Mr. REEVE, as a substitute for all these motions, the bill [H. R. 89] touching contempt in court, was taken up and read the second time. On his further motion, the constitutional restriction was dispensed with, the previous question made to operate upon it, and the bill finally passed by yeas 34, nays 8.
Mr. DICE, explaining his negative vote, thought there was altogether too much in this bill.
Mr. LANGDON made an ineffectual motion to take up Senate bills on the third reading.
Mr. BRISCOE made an ineffectual motion to take up the attorney fee clause bill H. R. 58.
On motion by Mr. SHAFFER, the bill [H. R. 412] to amend section 397 of the general practice act, where suit is brought for less than $50, was read the second time. On his further motion, the bill was read the third time, under a dispensation, and finally passed by yeas 34, nays 5.
On motion by Mr. SMITH, the bill [H. R. 683] to provide for the publication of the acts of the General Assembly within 30 days of adjournment, was read the second time, and also the third time, under suspension of the constitutional rule, and then passed the Senate by yeas ---, nays--, after amendment striking out "30" and inserting "60" days in lieu.
On motion of Mr. DAVENPORT the bill [H. R. 397] to require petitioners praying for change of location, vacation, etc., of highways, to give bonds for costs, was read the second time, under a suspension of the rule, and passed the Senate by yeas 38, nays 0.
Mr. TAYLOR explained the bill provides where report of viewers is against the petition there shall not be a subsequent view unless petitioners file a bond to pay costs in case their petition is not granted.
On motion by Mr. BENZ the bill [H. R. 476] to punish the embezzlement of railroad tickets was read the first time.
On motion by Mr. BRISCOE the constitutional rule was dispensed with, the bill read the second (by title only) and third times, and passed by yeas 39, nays 0.
On motion by Mr. LEEPER the bill [H. R. 138] requiring township trustees to apply surplus funds on lands to road purposes was read the second time, and on his motion the ad- verse report of the committee was changed to a favorable one, and as so amended concurred in.
Mr. OLDS opposed the passage of the bill. Township funds should be held sacred to the particular purpose for which they were raised.
Mr. WINTERBOTHAM could see nothing objectionable in the bill. In some cases there are funds lying idle in townships for years of no use to the public, and this bill would remedy that evil.
Mr. LEEPER made an ineffectual motion--yeas 17, nays 18--for a dispensation of the constitutional restriction, that the bill might be read the third time.
On motion by Mr. MERCER, the bill [H. R. 585] to vacate and sell a portion of the public square in the town of Fremont, Steuben county, was read the second time. On his further motion, the bill was read the third time, under a dispensation, and finally passed by yeas 40, nays 0.
On Mr. MAJORS' motion, the bill [H. R. 47] to enable the owners of wet lands to drain and reclaim the same, where it can not be done without affecting the land of others, was read the second time, and a committee substitute therefore was being read, when--
Mr. REEVE said if this bill were passed now there is not time to enroll it before the expiration of the constitutional limit in which to present bills for the signature of the governor. He made an ineffectual motion to lay it on the table.
Pending the reading of the substitute
The Senate took a recess till 2 o'clock.
Mr. KRAMER moved ineffectually to suspend the regular order of business and take up the bill H. R. 487.
Mr. BURRELL made an ineffectual motion--yeas 14, nays 24--to take up the expert bill [H. R. 557].
Mr. SHIRK made an ineffectual motion to take up the bill to establish a board of par- dons [H. R. 668]. The reading of the committee substitute for the bill, H. R. 47, pending at the time of taking the recess for dinner, was resumed and completed.
Mr. REEVE moved to amend the report of the committee, by striking out all after the enacting clause, and inserting new matter.
On motion by Mr. GARRIGUS this amendment was indefinitely postponed (before it was read).
Mr. REEVE made an ineffectual motion--yeas 8, nays 28--to lay the report on the table. He then moved to recommit the bill and report, with instructions to report at 4 o'clock.
Mr. STREIGHT could not support this measure at this late day, without time for consideration--affecting as it does property to the value of millions of dollars. He would be glad to see some good ditching measure adopted, but could not give this one his support.
Mr. GARRIGUS insisted this substitute is a well guarded measure, carefully compiled by the committee. It is a subject of general interest in the north part of the State, and only seeks to amend several sections in the law of 1875--giving the right of appeal, allowing supervision of township trustees, and other beneficial measures.
Mr. BRISCOE opposed the motion to recommit. He believed this one of the most important of all the ditching laws presented this session. It will prevent a large amount of vicious legislation, and should certainly be passed.
Mr. REEVE pointed out several evil features in this bill. His constituency are anathematizing all such measures as this. They want ditches opened in the same manner as public highways.
Mr. BRISCOE said this bill prevented going beyond the land benefitted by the ditch.
Mr. REEVE regarded that as the cat in this meal tub. These ditchers have gone 15 miles from the ditch and claimed benefits at $10 an acre to land which the owners were willing to sell for $8 an acre. This bill strikes down every right to property; and now when the time has passed in which a bill can be passed, to attempt to foist such a measure upon the people is unjust, improper and ought to be infamous
Mr. WEIR but this morning learned his bill was defeated in the House under the impression that this bill had become a law. The substitute unites the various amendments proposed to the law of 1875, including the one he desired, and he hoped the bill would pass.
The motion to recommit was rejected by yeas 9, nays 28.
The report of the committee was concurred in by yeas 31, nays 6.
Mr. GARRIGUS moved to suspend the constitutional restriction that the bill may be read the third time now, and on that motion he demanded the previous question, which was seconded, and under its operation the Senate refused to suspend the constitutional provision--yeas 32, nays 8--two-thirds not voting in the affirmative.
Mr. FOSTER offered a concurrent resolution for an appropriation of $451.90 to defray the expenses of the joint special committee to investigate the benevolent institutions of the State, to-wit: William H. Harrison, bookkeeper, expert services, 6 days at $6, total, $36; Watson & Dickerson, for short hand report, 3,900 folios, at 6 cents each, $234, stationery and binding, $8.50, total, $242.50; George F. Miller, for 6 days' services as expert bookkeeper at $6, total, $36; David B. Wilson; doorkeeper of the House, acting as sergeant-at-arms for the committee, $80.30; W. H.Hubbard, for subpoenaing a witness, $7; for witnesses, $39.90; Richard Huncheon, doorkeeper of Senate, acting sergeant-at-arms for committee, $20.90.
Mr. REEVE moved to strike out all allowances to the doorkeeper for mileage and service on the ground that he is in the employ of the State, and it is his business to perform the service demanded of him by virtue of his position. He said there is a telephone connecting the Insane Asylum with the city, from whence a number of mileages and services for return are charged.
Mr. OLDS favored passing the allowance as certified by the committee.
Mr. FOSTER said the allowance is to reimburse the doorkeepers for actual expenses.
The motion to strike out way agreed to.
On motion by Mr. REEVE, all allowances to witnesses in the employ of the State or its institutions, were stricken out.,
On motion by Mr. HARRIS, the matter was referred to the
On motion by Mr. OLDS, the bill [H. R. 487] for the vacation of public squares in certain cases, was read the second time. On his further motion the constitutional restriction was dispensed with, the bill read the third time, and finally passed by--yeas 36, nays 0.
On motion by Mr. WOOLEN, the Senate proceeded to the consideration of the bill [H. R.
377] to regulate the practice of medicine with the accompanying veto message of his
excellency the governor, which was read. The
Mr. MENZIES demanded the previous question, and under its operation the bill failed to pass--yeas 22, nays 15--over the veto of the governor--
Pending the roll-call--
Mr. DICE, when his name was called, said: Thinking every senator who voted for this bill in the face of the governor's objections is doing a wrong thing, and so believing, was compelled to vote "no."
Mr. REEVE, when his name was called, in explanation of his vote, said, believing this bill to be unconstitutional, in some of its provisions, which are unequal and unjust, and that it is of the species of class legislation, impracticable in its operation, and that is not only tends, but it will operate to enhance the evils it professes to cure; he had opposed it from the first as a bill that should not become a law. He therefore vote "no."
Mr. STEIGHT, when his name was called, said: Whenever the gag is placed on a measure of so much importance he was disposed to vote against it: but believing this class of legislation to be vicious in its nature, he voted "no."
So the bill failed to pass over the objections of the Governor
On motion by Mr. STREIGHT the bill [H. R. 568] supplemental to the common school law, authorizing school commissioners in towns of 30,000 inhabitants or over by the census of 1870 to purchase grounds and erect public library buildings, was read the second time, with committee amendments thereto.
Mr. STREIGHT made an ineffectual motion--yeas 23, nays 8, two-thirds of all members elected not voting in the affirmative--to suspend the constitutional role that the bill may be read the third time.
The LIEUTENANT GOVERNOR--No quorum voting there can be no business transacted except to adjourn or send for absentees.
Mr. STREIGHT made an ineffectual motion--yeas 17, nays 19--to adjourn, the yeas and nays being demanded by the chair.
Mr. BENZ insisted there had been a miscount. He counted 19 ayes to 17 nays. [Laughter].
On motion by Mr. SHIRK the bill [H. R. 688] to create a board of pardons was taken up.
Mr. BURRELL moved that the Senate adjourn. The yeas and nays being demanded by Messrs. Burrell, Benz, Wood, Harris and Reeve, they were ordered and being take resulted yeas 19, nays 17.
Mr. TRAYLOR opposing the motion because there are resolutions from the House on the files demanding the consideration of the Senate.
So at 4:45 the Senate adjourned--under the rules till Monday morning at 9 o'clock.
The session was opened this morning with prayer by Mr. Hubbrad, representative from the county of Henry.
The Clerk's minutes of yesterday' proceeding were not read as usual
Mr. SHULT, from the committee on claims, submitted a report on the Senate joint resolution, allowing $1,118 for coal, gas, etc, used by the general assembly in the regular and special sessions, recommending that the sum of $800 be allowed on said claim.
Mr. ENGLISH moved ineffectually--yeas 16, nays 64--to lay the report of the committee on the table.
The report of the committee was then concurred in.
On motion by Mr. TULLY, the resolution was amended by striking out "$1,118" and inserting "$800" in lien thereof.
The resolution as amended was then adopted.
Mr. MARCH offered a resolution giving the evidence papers in the investigation taken by the State House investigating committee, in charge of the State House commissioners.
Mr. WILLARD moved to amend by allowing any citizen access to and the privilege of copying the same if wanted, which was accepted by Mr. March.
Mr. DAILY offered a joint resolution authorizing the auditor or state to draw his warrant monthly for the payment of the chief of the bureau of statistics and geology.
The resolution was adopted by yeas 66, nays 19.
The bill [S. 91] to amend section 455 of the general practice act was read the first time and passed to the second reading.
Mr. JOHNSON called up his bill [H. R. 70] fixing the salary of members of the General Assembly and judges of the supreme and superior courts. Salary of members of the General Assembly shall be $5 per day and five cents mileage; judges of the supreme court, $3,000 per annum; cicuit courts judges, $2,000; superior judges, $2,500 per annum; criminal circuits, $1,500 per year--in counties having a city with a population of 40,000, criminal circuit judges shall receive $2,000 per annum; which was read the third time.
Mr. SLEETH thought the salary of the suprume judges was too small.
Mr. ENGLISH moved to recommit the bill with instructions to strike our all matter pertaining to the salary of judges.
On the motion of Mr. WILLARD, this motion was laid on the table--yeas 39, nays 37.
Mr. REED moved to recommit the bill to a special committee, with instructions to amend by adding a section fixing the compensation of grand and petit jurors in attendance upon the circuit, superior, and criminal courts of the State at $2 per day.
The SPEAKER ruled the motion our of order.
Mr. ALLEN, of Putnam, was in favor of the passage of this bill. He was not willing to concede to the judiciary and favoritism, and not think they should be a preferred few. He had favored every measure offered this winter to reduce the expenses of the State and county government. We have passed a bill reducing fees and salaries of county officers, and no let us pass this bill. If it had come late, it was better late than never. Jurors' per diem have been reduced to $1.60, and he could see no reason why the salary of judges should not be reduced.
Mr. OVERMEYER interrupted the gentleman by asking if he was not in favor of this bill because he knew that this is the last day of the session, and that the bill can not be passed? And Mr. TAYLOR, of Daviess, interposed the question, Why did you not vote for the fee and salary bill?
Not recognizing the interruption, Mr. A. concluded his remarks by saying he thought the passage of the bill would save thousands of dollars to the people.
Mr. HEROD spoke in opposition to the bill.
Mr. LEHMAN said: On last Wednesday a resolution was here, proposing to adjourn on
Saturday, and in speaking in favor of that resolution, we were charged with making
buncomb speeches and casting buncomb votes, and not these very gentleman come here, the
last day of the session, when they know that it can not pass, with a bill proposing to
cut down the salaries of judges and members of
Mr. WILLARD said this bill was offered to reduce the fees and salaries of that class of State offices which the fee and salary bill had left out.
Mr. WATSON was opposed to this bill. He had never heard a man ask for a reduction of the salaries of judges or members of the General Assembly.
Mr. SAINT had advocated a reduction of fees and salaries to a sum that would prevent officials from corrupting the ballot box as they have been doing.
Mr. MARCH said the less a man is paid the more honest he performs his official functions. "To the victor belong the spoils" is an adage which has poisoned the very vitals of politics.
Mr. HUBBARD said after a judge has served his term he loses his law practice, and this item ought to be considered. He thought $2,500 was not too much for a circuit judge. Referring to the pay of legislators, he expressed a willingness to head a list of members who would refund to the State $1 per day of their per diem.
Mr. JOHNSON said on the 10th day of January a bill was introduced similar to this one, and by some pollyfoxing the bill was lost, and when the fee and salary bill was before this House he had incorporated the same in that, but when it went to the committee it was dropped out.
Mr. OVERMEYER said: The gentleman who introduced the bill said we should begin reducing salaries where we can do some good. This bill was only introduced a few days ago, and this is the last day of the session for passing bills. Every one knows that the bill can not now go through the Senate, even it the House should pass it. Then the passing of this bill could do no good; besides there are provisions in the bill which are clearly wrong. Not willing to vote for a bill simply to make buncombe for its author, he should vote "no."
Mr. STEVENS said he had honestly desired the reduction of fees and salaries of State and county officers, but as that measure had signally failed, he was at this late day opposed to all attempts to reduce the salaries of our judges below the amounts now paid to our county officers. The bill had been introduced for buncombe, and therefore he hoped it would not pass.
Then bill then failed to pass the House by yeas 39, nays 47.
The bill [S. 147] in relation to the inspection of petroleum oil for illuminating purposes, etc., was read the first time and passed to the second reading.
The House concurred in Senate amendments to the bill [H. R. 683] providing for the prompt publication of the laws, acts, etc., of the 51st regular and special session. The Senate fixing the time at 6O days after the adjournment instead or 30.
A message was received from the governor returning Mr. Edwin's bill [H. R. 377] regarding the practice of medicine, with the executive veto--and his reasons at length for refusing to give the bill his official sanction.
The SPEAKER stated that inasmuch as the governor had returned, this bill the question before the House would be will the House reconsider the vote by which the bill passed the House?
Mr. SLEETH said there were portions of the bill he was in favor of and other portions he was opposed to.
Mr. BRIGGS said this bill applies only to those who hold themselves out to the world as qualified physicians, and that the State is overrun with quack doctors and they ought to be run out. A mistake of a doctor is covered only by the grave, and he thought the bill ought to pass, notwithstanding the governor's veto.
Mr. SCHOLL came here opposed to taking up the time of the session in medical legislation, but he had voted for this bill before ana he wanted it to become a law now.
Mr. DRAKE was opposed to allowing women to practice midwifery unless fully qualified, as he was quite certain that a large amount of the suffering of our women could be traced to the incompetency of these "mothers in Israel." He thought, too, that a woman could qualify herself for this practice by a six months' course of study under some competent physician; and that would remove all the objection of the governor. If women want to practice midwifery they should qualify themselves for that distinctive branch.
Mr. CONFER thought if this bill should become a law it would open an amount of litigation that would do no one any good.
Mr. PERRY was in favor of this bill for the good it would work to the people. He was in favor of passing the bill over the governor's veto.
Under the operation of the previous question--demanded by Mr. Faulkner--the bill failed for want of a constitutional majority--yeas 45, nays 38.
And then came the recess until 2 o'clock p.m.
The Speaker laid before the House the following:
GENTLEMEN--In behalf of "Alumni Association" of the "State University" and citizens of Bloomington, we invite you to visit our place to witness the exercises of the approaching "Semi-Centennial Commencement," June 9, 10 and 11, during which we tender the hospitalities of the city.
Hoping that yourself and members of the House over which you preside, composed of representative men of the State, may be able to avail themselves of the opportunity to learn more about the University and its facilities for furnishing a thorough education to the young men of the State, we are, most respectfully,
Mr. MIERS desired te second the invitation, and said he would be glad to see any and all members of the House on the days mentioned or on any other nay.
Mr. ROBINSON called up the bill [H. R. 619] for an act to regulate the letting of contracts for the doing of public work and the better protection of mechanics, which was read the third time, and finally passed the House by yeas 58, nays 20.
On the motion of Mr. OVERMEYER, the constitutional rule was suspended--yeas 69, nays
11--so that the bill [S. 147] for an act in
relation to the inspection of petroleum, oil for illuminating purposes, etc., might be
read the second time by title, read the third time by
Mr. CARTER thought there was a trick in this, and he could see no reason for the passage of the bill
Mr. HUBBARD said this was the Ohio law, word for word. It can not injure any one, but will be a great blessing to the people at large. He would be only too glad to vote for such a bill.
Mr. WILLARD--Its practical effect would be in favor of all the dealers in oil, and it would raise the price. It is a protective law, and will make new officers. It seemed to him to be a bill in the interest of a monopoly.
The bill then finally passed the House by yeas 58, nays 26.
The bill [S. 91] to amend section 455 of the general practice act was read the second time by title, and the constitutional rule being suspended therefor, the bill was read the third time.
Mr. SLEETH thought the bill was unguarded and on his motion the bill was laid on the table.
The bill [S. 261] to amend section two of an act in relation to county auditors was read the second time by title, and the third time by sections--the constitutional rule being suspended therefor--when--
On the motion of Mr. SHAUCK it was laid on the table.
Mr. EDWINS again called up his bill [H. R. 377] regulating the practice medicine, which was returned by the governor, with his objections thereto, this morning, and failed for want of a constitutional majority, and it was now finally passed the House of Representatives by yeas 52, nays 30.
Mr. CAMPBELL moved to take from the table the bill [S. 119] to abolish the superior court in Cass county, and put it upon its passage.
On the motion of Mr. SCHOLL, this motion was laid on the table by yeas 45, nays 20.
Mr. SAINT introduced a bill [H. R. 704] separating all gaming tables and other amusements from drinking saloons. He moved--ineffectually--for a suspension of the constitutional rule--yeas 44, nays 34--that the bill might be read the second time by title, the third time by sectionss, and put upon its passage.
Mr. MARCH called up his bill [H. R. 682] to amend section 3 of an act in relation to licensing the sale of intoxicating liquors, which was read the third time and failed to pass by yeas 38, nays 40.
Pending the roll call--
Mr. SLEETH, in explanation of his vote, said he believed it was contrary to law, but nevertheless, for the sake of a little cheap buncomb, he could afford vote "aye."
Mr. SNODDY, in explanation of his vote when his name was called, said: The gentleman from Rush (Mr. Sleeth) calls in question the legality of the local option feature. Unfortunately he was born a little too late. Forty years ago this very law was in force in every county in this State, and by the vigilance and industry of temperance men we have kept the evil from our door, and to-day there is not a single saloon in our county.
The vote was then announced as above.
Mr. OVERMEYER, introduced a bill [H. R. 705] for an act fixing the salary of deputy wardens of the State prisons at $1,000 per annum, and for an appropriation of $500 to purchase books for the prisons' libraries. He moved that the constitutional rules be suspended, in order that the bill may be read the second time by title, considered engrossed, the bill read a third time by sections and put upon its passage.
Mr. CARTER thought the bill ought not to pass, as the deputy warden had perquisites that would make more than $200 per annum to him.
The House refused to suspend the constitutional rule--yeas 54, nays 20.
Mr. SHANKS, from the
MR. MARCH and Mr. THOMPSON submitted minority reports which were read, and, without action thereon, laid on the table.
Mr. SHANKS said the committee has had this resolution under consideration, and three of the committee conclued that women are citizens, both of the State and the nation: that they are not prohibited by the constitution of the State, or of the nation from voting. That the national constitution secures to all citizens the right to vote, and denies to any State the power to refuse the right to vote on account of race, color or previous condition of servitude; and this has destroyed the power of the provisions of the constitution of Indiana, forbidding negroes or mulattoes to vote, and they are now permitted to vote. That white is a color, and women of a race, or races, as well as all men, should be allowed to vote. That they have been simply and only neglected and not prohibited by the constitution of the State from voting, and that females are now entitled to vote in elections where males are permitted to vote. He desired that the subject may have full thought by the people, and that they render justice to the females of this State, who in all the duties of citizenship have as faithfully discharged every duty to the State and country as have male citizens. The prohibition of the ballot to females keeps from the legislature of the country the highest moral element of society. He hoped this invidious distinction would no longer be tolerated in this State.
The House then adjourned.
On motion by Mr. VIEHE (the Lieutenant Governor not appearing on time) the senator from Jackson [Mr. Burrell] took the chair.
The reading of the minutes was dispensed with, as has been the almost uniform practice.
Mr. LANGDON offered a resolution, which was adopted, requiring the secretary, auditor and treasurer of State and the attorney general to report to the Senate of the Fifty-second General Assembly the total gross amounts of fees, salaries, compensation or income received or charged by him or his predecessor in office for each of the years 1876, 1877, 1878, 1879, 1880, and for the fraction of the year up to the date of the report; to be classified together with a reference to the statute and clause thereof, by virtue of which said income was received or charged. Also the amount allowed for assistance, their number, etc. and whether full accounts have been kept of all the matters required to be reported by tills resolution. .
Mr. WINTERBOTHAM, from the
A large number of bills were returned to the files from the several committees, and a few senators had leave to withdraw bills introduced by themselves.
On motion by Mr. VIEHE a concurrent resolution was adopted that the acts of the special and general sessions be bound in one volume with one index.
The House amendment to the Senate resolution reducing the allowance made to Marion county for coal, gas and water used during the regular and special sessions to $800 was concurred in.
Resolutions of thanks to Olney Newell, journal clerk of the regular session; and to ministers of the gospel who have opened the sessions with prayer, were offered and adopted.
Mr. REEVE offered the foiling: Resolved by the Senate, that the thanks of the Senate are extended to Lieutenant Governor Gray for his fairness, impartiality and uniform courtesy, as well as ability in presiding over the deliberations of the Senate, during the regular and special sessions of the Fifty- first General Assembly.
It was adopted by a rising vote.
Mr. FOSTER presented a majority report and Mr SMITH a minority report from the special committee to investigate the Benevolent institutions of the State--indentical with those submitted in the House of Representatives on Friday, which reports were placed on the files without reading.
Mr. WOOD offered a joint resolution requesting Indiana Congressmen to procure from the general Government appropriations to remove the barriers in the channels of the Kankakee and Calumet rivers, in order that the same may be made more efficient and useful in the interest of trade and commerce.
It was adopted without calling the yeas and nays.
Mr. SARNIGHAUSEN offered a resolution for the appointment of a special committee to wait on the governor. The LIEUTENANT GOVERNOR named Messrs. Sarnighausen and Taylor, who subsequently reported that his excellency had no further communication to make to the Senate.
Mr. REEVE offered a resolution, which was adopted, that; the librarian be instructed to take possession of the stationery, books and other property furnished for the Senate remaining unused, and preserve the same for the use of the next General Assembly, and the officers of the Senate are directed to turn over to the librarian all material in their hands at the close of the session.
Mr. REEVE offered a concurrent resolution, which was adopted, allowing $35 each to the two journal clerks for finishing the copying of the Senate journals for deposit in the secretary of state's office, and making up the journal of to-day.
On motion by Mr. HARRIS the House concurrent resolution in relation to the 51 setts of revised statues voted to senators, was taken up and concurred in.
On motion by Mr. LEEPER it was--
Resolved, That the thanks of the Senate are due and hereby tendered the commissioners if Marion county for their generosity in extended to the General Assembly the use of rooms in the Court House for the holding of its sessions until the new State House shall be completed.
Mr. REEVE submitted the following:
Mr. PRESIDENT--The
Resolved by the Senate, the House of Representatives concurring, That the governor, auditor and secretary of state are hereby authorized to settle the claim of W.H. Drapier for Brevier Reports printed for the State under a custom sanctioned by acts of every General Assembly since 1857 in his favor for 17 years, as they may deem proper.
Mr. HARRIS contended that when this matter was before the Senate two years ago this claim of $1,993.60 was settled by a Senate resolution allowing the claim at $500.
Mr. REEVE replied that $500 was to pay a claim for services rendered in the Senate, allowed unanimously by the Senate committee on claims, (as was also the present claim,) and paid out of the Senate fund on a warrant drawn by the president thereof.
Mr. HARRIS and Mr. FOWLER insisted the $500 was in full satisfaction of the $1,993.60 claim.
The resolution was rejected.
On motion by Mr. FOWLER, the House concurrent resolution for an allowance of $200 each to the two principal clerks of the House for reading proof and indexing journals, with an amendment by the Senate committee on finance allowing $200 each to the two principal secretaries of the Senates for similar service, was taken up.
On motion by Mr. REEVE, (inasmuch as this work is devolved upon the printing bureau under a clause in the fee and salary bill). Under the operation of the previous question, the resolution was rejected by yeas 11, nays 23.
On motion by Mr. LANGDON the House joint resolution, authorizing the payment of the salary of the chief of the bureau of statistics to be made quarterly, was taken up and adopted by yeas 27, nays 8.
Mr. BENZ moved to take up the bill [H. R. 377] to regulate the practice of medicine.
Mr. WILSON moved to lay the motion on the table. The yeas and nays were demanded, and, being ordered and taken, resulted--yeas 14, nays 18.
No quorum voting--
Mr. STREIGHT moved that the Senate adjourn sine die, whereupon--
The LIEUTENANT GOVERNOR said: Senators: This General Assembly having decided to close its labors, its laws are now a part of the legislative history of the State, and I trust that time and experience will show that the wisdom of its acts will compare favorably with those of any former General Assembly.
It is possible that some things have been done which had better been left undone; that you have failed to pass some measures which the public wants demand. To some extent all legislation is an experiment. But few measures are passed by unanimous consent. There is most always a divided opinion as to the practicability or justness of the measure pending. This necessitates an interchange of views and breeds discussion. The friends of the measure, believing the public welfare demands its passage, strive by argument to perfect its provisions and secure for it the requisite majority. Its opponents, believing its enactment will be inimical to the State, strive with equal zeal to prevent its becoming a law. And thus what some cons der as time wasted in debate is but an honest endeavor to conserve the public good. This diversity of opinion and inability to see alike is one of the faults of poor human nature, and will exist as long as man is fallible. When he arrives at a state of infallibility no legislative bodies will be needed. There will be neither makers nor breakers of the law. Then all mankind will walk together in one harmonious intercourse, amenable only to Him whose laws are written on the tablets of eternal time. Then indeed will the millennium have come, and that car of natural progress, whose wheels turn not backward, will have reached its destination, which lies in the brightness of the latter day.
The labors of this General Assembly have not been light. It has apportioned the State for representation in the General Assembly and for representation in Congress. It has enacted upwards of a 100 other laws, among which are: reducing the rate of interest; on contract and judgment, exempting to the debtor from execution property to the amount of $600, exempting a portion of the wages of the laborer so necessary to the support of his family, saving from attachment and garnishee proceeding the laborer's wages in cases where the plaintiff and defendant are non-residents of the State, to farther protect the life and health of the miner in his dark and perilous employment in the mine, for the better government of the benevolent and reformatory institutions, reducing the fees and salaries of State and county officers saving to the people thereby alone upwards of a $100,000 annually. I trust its legislation will prove beneficial to the people and tend to further the prosperity and renown of the State.
Senators, I thank you for your approval of the manner in which I have discharged the
duties of the chair. Not in words merely formal, but with deep sincerity do I thank you.
I have discharged its duties as I saw them, and understood them. Actuated by no motive
other than to preserve order and decorum, and faciltate legislation. The duties of a
presiding officer are necessarily laborious, requiring patience, strict attention and
prompt decision, and if at any time the manner of my rulings have seemed harsh, I assure
you it was not so intended, and sincerely hope 1 have in no instance been so unfortunate
as to unintentionally give offense. I can not leave without expressing the deep
obligation I am under to each of you for that defference with which you have always
bowed to my rulings. And for that respect and courtesy exhibited toward the chair at all
times, even when political asperity and party rancor seemed to hold sway in the Chamber.
I thank you to a far greater extent than I can find words to express; and in parting can
truly say that I am possessed of no feeling other than that of the kindliest nature
toward each and every member and employe of this body, and shall carry with me through
life the most pleasing recollections of our associations, and hope that without regard
to political proclivities, may count each of you my personal friend, The final
adjournment of a legislative body is to me always an occasion of solemnity. Despite
myself the thought will flash upon my mind that these tongues that have been so
And so the Senate was adjourned sine die.
The reading of the clerk's minutes was omitted.
Mr. SHAUCK called the attention of the House to the fact that he was recorded on the roll call as voting for the bill H. R. 377, regulating the practice of medicine. He wanted it understood that he voted against the bill, and asked that the roll call be so corrected.
Mr. FAULKNER, from the special committee appointed to investigate the attorney general's office, submitted the following resolutions:
Resolved, That a commission of three be appointed by the speaker of the House to continue the investigation of the office of attorney general, during the terms of office of James C. Denny and Clarence A. Buskirk, to ascertain what amounts of money have been collected by each, from whom collected, and what office the person from whom the collection was made held at the time, if any, and, if not, whether the moneys collected had been in the hands of such person in an official capacity and returned after his term of office had expired, on account of what fund the moneys were collected by said Denny and Buskirk. That commissions were charged by them and their assistants, from what counties the collections were small, oat or what funds the commissions were retained, and out of what county; the full amount collected in each during his term of office, and the amount paid over to the proper county and State treasuries, and the amount such commission shall believe said Denny and Buskirk are indebted to the State or any of the counties for moneys collected and not paid over.
Further resolutions declared that, to assist the commission in their inquiry, all county officers are required to make reports to them, on demand, of any payments of money made to the attorneys general or their assistants; a tabulated statement of the results of the investigation shall be made to the governor within 10 days after its completion; if there is found to be due to the State any moneys by either Denny or Buskirk, suit shall be brought by an attorney appointed by the governor, cost not to exceed S500, provided that if the commissioners and governor shall believe that either of the parties is insolvent and the sureties relieved by the statute of limitations, then no such suit shall be brought against such party; the commission shall receive $6 per day each for their services.
And, whereas. It has been made to appear to the satisfaction of your committee that the Attorney General Buskirk, and that another record of such transactions was by him kept, as required lay law, which was carried away by him at the close of his term, and is not now in the office, where by law it is required to remain and as said book contains the records of one of the departments of the State government, and is the property of the State, therefore
Resolved, That if Mr. Buskirk, on demand of the commission, refuses or fails to return said book to the office of the attorney general. the present attorney general is hereby directed to institute such legal proceedings as he may deem proper to compel the return of the same to said office.
Mr. TAYLOR, of Daviess, offered the following as a substitute, which was read for information :
Resolved, That the governor appoint an expert to investigate the books in the attorney general's office under the tenure of James C. Denny and Clarence A. Buskirk, and if upon such investigation any amount be due the State from either of said persons, that he be authorized, and is hereby empowered, to institute suit against them, or either of them, or their bondsmen, respectively, unless such proposed action is barred by the statute of limitations.
Mr. EDWINS said that he was not opposed to investigating, but he was opposed to any committee being appointed from this House at $6 a day for 40 days to go roaming over the county investigating what had been already discovered, and after the parties were found to be insolvent. There had been an investigation of the benevolent institutions, and according to the evidence the blackest and darkest of crimes and direst treachery had been perpetrated. The State officials had, according to the testimony, been convicted of fraud and peculation, and gentlemen who were so anxious to raise this committee had voted to smother and hide this great crime.
Mr. WORKS said if this House wanted this investigation carried on satisfactorily and completely this resolution should be adopted, as he thought it was the cheapest and best way the matter could be settled. If it was the desire of this House to recover back the money said to be due the State from these gentlemen, it should be done as soon as possible.
Mr. SNODDY wanted to see this subject come squarely before this House, and demanded a record by a yea and nay vote.
Mr. TAYLOR, of Daviess, was opposed to the passage of the resolution, but was in favor of authorizing the governor to appoint an expert to examine into the matter.
Mr. SHANKS said it was due to these men that they should have a thorough investigation, and if they had done wrong the people ought to know it. The honor of the State and these men demand that this investigation shall go on to a fair completion.
The Senate concurrent resolution, for binding the acts of the regular and special session, in one volume, was adopted.
On the motion of Mr. COPELAND a committee of two--Messrs. Copeland and Shutt--was appointed to wait upon the governor to ascertain if his excellency had any further communication to make to the House.
Mr. SLEETH offered a concurrent resolution which was adopted, that in order that the
people s Jail have at least an intimation of the laws by which they are governed, that
the bureau of printing shall, within five days after the adjournment of the present
General As-[sembly]
Mr. JOHNSON offered a resolution, which was adopted, that the thanks of this House are hereby tendered to the Hon. Henry S. Cauthorn, for the able and impartial manner in which he has presided over the deliberations of the special session of the Fifty-first General Assembly.
Mr. CUNNINGHAM, offered the following concurrent resolution, which was rejected:
Whereas, The compiler of the Brevier Reports has been on instant duty every hour of every session of the Indiana Legislature for twenty-one (21) years last past,
And whereas, Such constant consecutive service has no parallel in the history of this commonwealth,
Therefore, commemorating the attainment of his majority-year since entering this Legislature.
Resolved by the House of Representatives, the Senate concurring, that W. H. Drapier is authorized to continue the Brevier Legislative Reports at the same price and the same number of copies furnished by him to every General Assembly since 1857 for (17) seventeen years.
Mr. WILLARD offered a concurrent resolution, which was adopted--yeas 42, nays 25--allowing Thomas McDaniels $19 for extra services as doorkeeper.
The Senate concurrent resolution allowing some $450 for expenses incurred in the investigation of the benevolent institutions,was adopted.
Mr. EDWINS offered a concurrent resolution, which was adopted, authorizing the printing of the testimony and reports of the investigation of the benevolent institutions, in pamphlet form.
Mr. NAVE offered a concurrent resolution, which was adopted, instructing our senators and requesting our representatives in Congress to use their influence in securing an approprition adequate to, and for the purpose of, opening a ship canal from Lake Michigan to some point on the Wabash river, and the dredging and making navigable the Wabash river, from the point of intersection by such canal to its mouth.
Mr. SAINT moved to reconsider the vote adopting the resolution by which the report of the Benevolent Institutions investigating committee and the evidence thereof were ordered printed.
Mr. WILLARD moved to lay that motion on the table.
The yeas and nays were demanded and being taken, discovered no quorum present.
Messrs. Shanks, Briggs and Herod being called for made farewell addresses.
Speaker Cauthorne delivered his farewell address to the members of the House, and so closed the first special session of the Fifty-first General Assembly of the State of Indiana.
ERRATA--Page 6, the bill H. R. 2 was introduced by J. Norman Davidson. Page 134, 4th line from bottom of 1st column read "minority" instead of "majority", in the 13th line from the bottom for the words "the adoption" should be substituted the words "laying on the table;" and in the 25th line from the bottom read "rejected" for "registered". Page 191, 30th line from bottom of 1st column, instead of "Library" read "University,"--see close of Senate proceedings on page 196.
The particulars of Legislative expenses for the extra session of 1872, itemized in the
Specific Bill approved Dec'ber 21,1872, justifies our statement that the Legislature found
the cost of the newspaper subsidies for legislative reports in this city to exceed that of
the authentic Brevier.-- The cost of newspapers for that session above
that of the Brevier Legislative Reports was $356.73. The newspaper
vanished, but the Brevier is extant with all its contributions to
history.
The Legislature finding that the cost of their newspaper subsidies exceeded that of the
authorized BREVIER REPORTS, the subsidy was cut off by the act of
December 19, 1872, By that act the newspaper became justly and legally recognized as but
"stationery" for the people and their representatives, and, by implication, as unfitted
and unworthy to be intrusted and authorized at the public expense as the depository of
their solemn legislative records.
The Brevier Reports have done for the people what the newspapers are
unfit and unable to do in the matter of a just and stern legislative record; and the work
has been done cheaper than the newspaper charges which have been paid out of the treasury
for their partial,personal, restricted and unreliable matter called "Legislative
Proceedings."
The BREVIER REPORTS contain a record that is impartial,--not a single
partial report can be found in any one of the eighteen volumes issued.
The BREVIER Reporters in the 22 years of its publication have been
careful chiefly to make their work here a good record, and rests its claims to the
cherishment of the Legislature upon that alone. They have gone before no Committee,
lobbied none, received no approaches for individual favor, nor shaped their work at any
time with sinister or partizan objects. It has rested solely and all the time on its
merits, its integrity and its fairness; and for these it has all the time received the
favoring notice of the Legislature.
As compensation should always be regulated by the skill required, there can be no
question but that the pay for service but few are competent to perform should largely
exceed the pay for labor that many are able to do. These Brevier
Reports, in each page, contain more than three times as much matter as there is in
one page of the Supreme Court Reports, yet the Brevier Reports are
furnished to the state for two-thirds of a cent a page, while the Reporter of the Supreme
Court has received three-quarters of a cent per page, besides the copyright.
In this submission of the Brevier Reports we have not been mistaken as
to the common and growing public demand for just and intelligent public records. We have
tried to meet that demand, and to provoke parties abler than we are to supply it as it
ought to be supplied. And we still suppose that the representatives of the people know
what they want in this matter know whether it is better to do everything here at the
Capitol by memory and word of mouth than to stand upon a fair and open record for history.
We have proceeded strictly upon the presumption that the peopled representatives know
what is due to the country and to themselves in this matter of a record of their
legislative action. And if there is any consideration against the continuance of the Brevier except that of its cost, the same conceit is as much against the
lobbies and open doors for the sessions of the General Assembly; and it is at least one
hundred years too late for secret sessions.
The work can not be done by jobbers for the money that has been paid for it; and as to
the standing contract price of the work, it carries that on every page: for "two thirds of
a cent a page per copy' it is furnished to the proper accounting officers Of the State in
printed sheets, procured in every item of its cost at our own expense.
The Brevier Legislative Reports have been acceptable to the Legislature
and the people for seventeen years. The work has stood sternly on its merits with each
particular session since '57 and it is offered again with the ability and desire on the
part of these reporters to make such an abridgment of the State Legislative Record in the
best form and at the cheapest rate.
Considering the difficulties and opposition incident to such a work; the contingencies of failing health and failing purse, and failing at length to make an acceptable offering of the work, there is nothing in the offering of it on our part but hard work, and the good name of unswerving workers, much very delicate personal responsibility, and some pecuniary hazard--(large for our means--) and, last and at the best, but small pay.
As seventeen consecutive sessions of the General Assembly have authorized the publication
of the Brevier Reports it is regarded respectful and a duty to continue
a proffer of the service that has been acceptable to every Legislature for so many years.
None in the State are so competent to make a Legislative Record as the projectors of the
Brevier Reports because the lives of no other Indianians have been
passed in such like service.